



.0" ^^ ^77.*^ ^'^' 








♦ ^F >#>■, <»^ 












3.0 VS 









t.^^.r 



'0,1* A <:,. *'T7V'' ,0"^ ^ 






' 
















VV 



\P9 
ji " • • « .V >^ " • * • A- <^ 












> ^^-n^ V 



O^ •..o» .0* 











1* ^^ <\ 
<^ .. -^ '•"" »' 



^^<^ 































•^.^'V 
^ % 



&x /^'i^-yo .//^iX /^-}^'S 















REVIEW 



OP 



AN ANTI-ABOLITION SERMON, 



PREACHED AT 



JIUasant WnlUn. 3** Wi> 



BY 



REV. BENJAMIN F. WILE, 



Angnit) 183S. ^ ' 



BY JOHN H. WIGGINS. 



'*0 



WHITESBORO : 

PRESS or THE ONEIDA INSTITUTE. 

1838. 



TO THE READER. 



At the solicitation of friends whom I respect as such, and love and honor for 
their laudable and untiring efforts in behalf of the oppressed, I have undertake* 
this work. 

I make no other apology for its appearance, than that Humanity and Truth 
required something of the kind. 

I do not seek to be a ' pulpit dictator ; ' but I do seek to check the currency of 
error. It is an inherent privilege, as well as a christian duty, to rebuke wickedness 
whether found in high places or low. A minister occupying such a station as the 
author of the sermon in question, is expected to be right, especially on subjects of 
vital importance. 

By the manner in which this individual has treated the anti-slavery enterprize 
and its advocates, the pubhc mind, at least portions of it, has been abused and 
duped by naked assertion received as a matter of fact, without further investigation ; 
considering the source from which they came unquestionable. 

In this way abohtionists have been wronged and their motives impugned. To 
remove false as weU as anti-repubhcan impressions in relation to them, is, then, the 
first object of these pages. 

Many who read these remarks are acquainted with the circumstances which led 
to the delivery of this discourse. I have not time here to repeat them. AUusion- 
may be had to them during the remarlis which follow. 

In attempting what I have, I am aware I labor under great disadvantages — youth 
contending with age, experience, and influence. But it is for the sake of humanity 
and truth, and I trust much in their intrinsic merits. In doing it, I have not 
searched 

' The dim-discovered traces of the mind.' 
It is first and fundamental principles, evident as the noon-day's sun, to which the 
attention is called. 

Reader, will you hear both sides ? 

The objections and the remarks belonging to them, are placed immediately pre- 
ceding the reply for the sake of convenience. Most of the introductory remarks 
are omitted, being of litde or no importance. 

It is necessary to state, in this connection, that most of that part of this review 
which refers to those passages in the New Testament brought forward in the ' ob- 
jections,' is from the pen of Pres. Green, of Oneida Institute. They are distin- 
guished by the usual mark. J. H. W. 
Oneida iNSTrrcTE, October 22, 1838. 



*^ SERMON. 

^^ 

Declaration.* — / abbor slavery. I am opposed to U as a political, 
a moral and religious evil — as a great sin in the sigJU of God. 

OBJECTIONS TO THE COUBSE PURSUED BY THE ABOtlTIONISTS. 

FiBST. The undue prominence which is given to the subject of 
abolition, is, in my mind, an objection to the course of the abolition- 
ists. Every thing should have its appropriate place. 

The church should take a stand against all sin ; but in doing this, 
we should act, at least, with some discretion and judgment. 

The cause of temperance was presented ; the church has met it. 
She beheld the evil, and has succeeded in washing her hands nearly 
clean of its pollutions. 

But this cause never claimed any prominence over the doctrines 
and duties of religion. It appeared and was received as religion's 
handmaid and assistant, and not as religion's dictator and tyrant. — > 
It was under these circumstances that the cause of temperance pre- 
vailed both in the church and in the world. 

But the cause of abolition appears in a different light, and claims a 
higher seat in the church of Christ. Its place must be chief or 
hence, anarchy and confusion immediately ensue. It admits of sub- 
ordination to no other cause, scarcely to the cross itself. On the 
other hand, it is the ^sine qua non' in every thing — in religion, 
politics, and the world. The minister must consequently bring out 
the evils of slavery and the advantages of abolition, or he is not en- 
gaged in the appropriate work of the gospel ministry. It is predicted 
at once, that the church will never enjoy a revival of religion until 
the church and people take the whip of anti-slavery, and ride the 
hobbv of abolition. * * ****** 



:iatis. 



* The gentleman, before giving his objections, declared, with great emphf . 
the above words, his abhorrence of slavery, flow much he is opposed to the in»ti. 
tution, will be seen in the course of the following pages. 



It has been urged, that the conversion of the world can not proceed 
until this subject succeed. Hence, many have withdrawn from all 
other objects and devoted themselves to this. Are we to stop Mis- 
sions, Tracts, and Bibles, until all the South is abolitionized ? This 
is an unhallowed course.* 



* In concluding this point, it is asserted in a very vague and unqualified manner, 
that abohtionists have divided churches. This remark is so utterly, and I may say 
notoriously groundless, that it is deemed hardly worthy of reply. 

The gentleman probably had reference to the Free churches of the city of New 
York, which have been, it is true, for some time past, in a lamentable condition. 

That it is owing to pro-slavery movements more than abolition measures, appears 
evident to all unacquainted with the circumstances, from the following communication, 
written bv Mr. Davison, of New York, to Mr. Garrison, of Boston, relative to their 
proceedings. 

Dear Friend Garrison, — Thinking that the following extraordinary proceedings, 
which have recently occurred in this city, were of such a nature as to excite your 
feehngs, I hasten to communicate to you the circumstances. 

The Rev. Joel Parker, the great apologist for slavery, arrived here about three 
months since, from New Orleans, and was greeted by an invitation to lecture in the 
Tabernacle on a Sunday evening, wliich invitation he accepted, and made his ap- 
pearance in such a guise as would have reminded you of the adage of a wolf in 
sheep's clothing ! Tlris performance was highly applauded by the majority of his au- 
ditors, who were of course predisposed in his favor, and being principally members 
of the church, felt a strong desire to hear a little more perversion of the scripture from 
this apostate and pretended disciple, and so they made strenuous exertions to have 
him for their pastor ; but finding the abolitionists too strong for them, they sought to 
accomplish their object by other means ; and accordingly they (the colonization mem- 
bers) invited the 1st Free Chiu'ch to unite with them, which invitation they accepted, 
and the imion took place on the 1st of July, under the joint pastorship of the Rev. 
George DuflTield, a true abolitionist, and J. HelfTenstein, a zealous colonizationist. — 
They commenced their labors together according to their different views, but this 
union was of course of but short duration ; for a large number of the new members 
felt dissatisfied with the abohtion pastor, Mr. Duffield, and the other party experi- 
enced the same feehngs with respect to the colonization minister. Bickering and 
dissention were of course the only church business these devout colonization Chris- 
tians attended to, and the strife was ended, eventually, by the resignation of both 
the reverend gentlemen. 

Then the darling object of the humane colonizationists stood revealed — the 
cloven foot was visible, and the ' very cunning of the scene ' was exhibited by putting 
the Rev. Joel Parker in nomination for the vacant pastoral charge, which ended on 
Monday in the election and call of that benevolent gentleman by a small majority 
of the members. I understand that our friend Lewis Tappan, and the other true 
friends of liberty of both colors, will not remain amongst tliis nest of unclean birds. 

The third free Presbyterian church has, within the last month, been discontinued 
as a free church, and the pews have been offered for sale. Of course, a question 
arose whether the colored people would be allowed to purchase seats. The matter 
was decided by a vote next to unanimous, that the colored people should not be 
allowed to purchase seats, (there being but two dissenting voices.) So they are sen- 
tenced to sit in a corner up in the gallery. So ends the chapter of American preju- 
dice ; or perhaps these pro-slavery Christians in the plenitude of that charity which 
they boast and so liberally bestow on themselves will call it benevolence or philan- 
thropy. 

One is inclined to wonder by what machiavelian art all this train of events has 
been accomphshod for tlie furtherance of evil ; but the wonder will cease when you 
learn that Mr. Mor^e, of the N. Y. Observer, and Mr. Halo, of the .Tournal of Com. 
mcrce, have connected themselves with this congregation within the last three months* 
so that the whole influence of satanic policy and Jesuitical cunning was put in requi- 
sition in both churches by these gentlemen and kindred spirits. 



REPLY TO THE OBJECTIONS. 

Admitting the first remark as a matter of course, and as identical 
with the axiom ' order is the first law of nature,' the force of the 
objection appears to be this : Abolitionists make the abolition of 
slavery an object of special effort. Now, no reasonable man will 
deny that the church should take a stand against all sin. That it has 
not and does not, has become almost a radical evil, over which the 
Christian is constrained to weep. The Christianity of the apostolic 
and primitive fathers has almost dwindled away, and a temporizing 
spirit has crept in, and, like a plague-spot on the soul, wasted its most 
vital energies. Sin stalks with its brazen head in our churches, and 
hides its hateful form in our pulpits. In many cases the church has 
become a great refuge of lies, and oppression has found its firmest 
stay in many of its members. But, in this case, there are many 
happy exceptions — a few who love the truth and walk in the ways of 
the Lord. Such are those who occupy the front ranks of 7nost of the 
benevolent operations of the day. These societies or combinations of 
Christians, concentrate the best energies of the church to destroy the 
strong-holds of satan, and form an excellent test of the genuineness 
of the Christian profession. They have had the same effects as the 
persecutions of the first and second centuries. They have sifted the 
church, brought out into vigorous action what was holy, and exposed 
what was false and hypocritical. 

In proof of this, mark for a moment the introduction and progress 
of Moral Reform. The church is nominally opposed to the violation 
of the seventh commandment, yet for years this sin, with all its ten 
thousand concomitant evils, has increased with fearful rapidity, until 
fair virtue wept at the desolation of her offspring — and nothing ef- 
fectual was done until a McDowall appeared as her devoted advocate, 
and laid down his life a sacrifice upon her altar. Yet McDowall found 
his bitterest foes among nominal Christians, and the church was found 
to be opposed to this sin, as it is to slavery, in the abstract. 

The same may be said of the Temperance Reform. Church mem- 
bers looked upon it as a wild, visionary and fanatical scheme. But 
the truth was, Bacchus had erected his altar in the holy sanctuary, 
and often had his most servile devotee in the pulpit ; and instances 
have been known where the minister has taken the bottle in the sacred 
desk, that he might be filled with the ' spirit.^ 

How, then, the question naturally arises, have these two evils, to a 
great extent, been stayed, and their threatening tide rolled back ? — 
I answer, by assuming that very position which the gentleman has 



termetl an ' inidue prominence ' — by taking the very course whicli 
abolitionists have adopted. 

In the Temperance Reform, societies were organized, tracts, papers, 
and books were published and scattered throughout the country, agents 
were employed, and some of the7n, even left the * appropriate work of 
the ministry.' 

Temperance was a prominent doctrine in the sermon, in the prayer 
meeting, and in the church. Such an array of oppositionj^met every 
where, under all forms, this hydra monster could not resist. 

After all, it was this • undue pz'ominence,' or what more classical 
scholars would call uUraism, that breathed out upon this man-destroyer 
the death-damps of cold water. In this cause, what was considered 
the duty of the minister ? To bring out the evils of intemperance 
and the advantages of temperance. Every church member was con- 
sidered as morally bound to aid in that benevolent enterprise. 

In this connection, it is no more than justice to state that in this 
respect the Rev. gentleman has literally performed his duty. I know 
of no man who has ' whipped ' the ' hobby ' of temperance with more 
zeal than himself. 

But in what respect does temperance differ from abolition ? Surely 
the difference is not so metaphysical as the gentleman, in another part 
of his discourse, would have us to infer. It consists only in the evils 
which it aims to subvert. The same means, as every candid reader 
will at once admit, must be adopted, viz. moral suasion, which is truth 
applied to the conscience, either orally or by means of publications. 

Intemperance is a small evil compared with that which crushes and 
annihilates the religious and political interests of nearly three millions 
of intelligences. 

The drunkard, in most cases, becomes such deliberately and volun- 
tarily ; the slave is made such by the strong arm of power which 
ranks him with chattels and things. The children of inebriates may 
escape the evils of their parents ; but the child of the slave is con- 
signed, from the first moment it looks on its mother, to a hopeless 
bondage, or perhaps made an article of merchandize before its birth. 
This is the evil which claims the attention of the American church, 
calling upon it to rescue the down-trodden and oppressed. 

Abolitionism, a word which many regard with pious horror, in its 
broadest sense, is nothing more than the right of the slave and the 
duty of the master, and, as a matter of course, the right of the slave 
tn bo heard, and the dutv of a minister and church to hear him. 



Tliis, the gentleman 1ms treated as something singular or strange, 
and almost insinuates that he would be moving out of his proper 
sphere, if he should plead for the dumb ! Yet there is no doctrine 
more plainly elucidated on every page of the Bible, than this— the 
duty of Christians to expose sin and bring out the advantages of 
reform. Whose duty is it, more emphatically than the minister's, 
thus to present the truth ? Slavery he acknowledges to be a ' polit- 
ical, moral and religious evil.' If so, the abolition of that evil must 
be a political, moral and religious good or ' advantage.'' 

Here, then, the conclusion is unavoidable, from his ov/n concession, 
that since he has not brought out the advantages of reform on this 
subject (slavery,) he is reckless to any and all of these points. 

What is the appropriate business of a minister, other than to sub- 
serve the interests of humanity ? To whom may the slave look for 
sympathy, if not to the accredited ambassadors of Christ ? To sym- 
pathize with miserable man, the incarnate God died on the cross ! — 
Are his followers ' v/iser than He ? ' 

Is it, then, a reasonable objection to the course of the abolitionists, 
if they urge or demand— what ?— Why, that ministers of Christ 
should not perjure themselves by violating a most solemn oath, ' that 
they will lift up their voice as a trumpet against the sins of the peo- 
ple—to preach the gospel to every creature.' Do they preach the 
gospel to every creature, when they exclude nearly one sixth of the 
population of the United States ? ' 

But abolitionists never have desired that the subject of emancipa- 
tion should absorb every thing else, or, to quote the words of the gen- 
tleman, become a 'siwe ^wa noM.' And this objection comes with a 
very ill grace from one who discards it altogether. The friends of 
the oppressed have only wished the minister and people to take the 
same stand against the sin of slavery that they do against theft, high- 
way robbery, adultery, murder and cruelty, of which American slavery 
is the sum total — that the minister should preach against it, and in 
behalf of the oppressed ; and their claims are no greater than those 
presented by the friends of Temperance or Moral Reform, which have 
been readily admitted. But if the magnitude of the evil which abo- 
litionists aim to destroy, adds any weight to their claims, their 
appeals are tenfold more urgent upon the Christian church to be up 
and doing. Abolition is a primary doctrine of the ' cross,' and if 
ministers are so discretionary (?) as never to speak about or admit il 
in their sermons, their religion is a mere sham — the outside — while 



they have not tasted tlic kernel. If 'anarchy and confusion ensue,' 
because aboUtion seeks its proper place, the disorganizers are on the 
side of its opposers. The Sadducces and priests styled Peter and 
Paul 'disturbers of the people.' So infidels say the Bible has been 
the cause of much bloodshed. But who shed the blood ? — were they 
Christians or infidels ? So with anti-abolitionists : after they have 
destroyed the church, and made banlirupt their own Christian char- 
acter, a hue-and-cry is raised against the abolitionists. Verily, the 
gentleman is conscientious ' beyond compare.' 

But it is asked, " Are we to stop Missions, Tracts, and Bibles, until 
all the Sotith is abolitionizcd 1 ' By no means. Yet it is certain the 
world can never be converted, and the millennium usher in its glories, 
until slavery is abolished. But what is it to abolitionize the South ? 
The gist of abolition is to mission-ize, tract-fze, and bible-ize it. — 
These are integrals of this wonder-working word ; and when we talk 
of abolitionizing the South, we mean to christianize it, and deliver it 
from down-right heathenism. But abolitionists d^ say that it is sheer 
and superlative inconsistency to send Missionaries, Tracts and Bibles 
to heathen in a distant country, when it is made penal to do the same 
to three millions of heathen in our own land. Is this not good logic — 
aye, a matter of fact ? ' A bitter fountain can not send out pure and 
sweet waters.' 

That religion of*the South which sanctions slavery, is nothing more 
than the direct despotism baptized into nominal Christianity — armed 
with the weapons of destruction. Who of the heathen would receive 
that gospel which sanctions the enslavement of its converts, if perchance 
they had a skin not colored like its advocates ? Granting the 
objection to have all the force possible, it would be better that the 
missionary wheels should revolve slowly, until this mighty evil is 
destroyed, than that they should be clogged hereafter, and groan under 
a back-water of moral impurity. Already has religion become as a 
stench in the nostrils of the unchristianized world and its advocates 
treated with scorn and contempt. Why is it ? Because we have sent 
among them gore-sprinkled bibles, blood-dipped tracts, and missionaries 
sustained with the proceeds of slaveholding. Because abolitionists 
wish to wipe off these stains, they are denounced as fanatics. But 
I am not willing to admit, even for a moment, that such is the case. 
Abolitionists arc the most zealous supporters of the bible, tract and 
missionary causes, and their every -day efforts are proof positive of 
this assertion. That their operations arc more extended, benevolent 
and universal none can den v. 



• 9 

The slaves of the South are, by the confession of slavehoIdeM 
themselves, heathen ; and what authority do certain ministers adduce 
to justify them in debarring them of the light of the gospel ?* No such 
authority is found in the Bible, and consequently it must be of man, 
who so often * deviseth wickedly.' Not so with abolitionists ; they 
gather all under the same banner of the cross, and bid them look on 
Him who was crucified thereon, and live. Those who are to be co- 
workers with God in converting a revolted world and cheering up 
the waste of the desert with the song of the redeemed, must, from the 
necessity of the case, adopt abolition principles. It is an unchanging 
element of our religion to shed its blessings irrespective of persons. 
The principle of universal love to man, in whatever condition he may 
be found, is the elixir vifcB, or very vitality of Christianity, It is a 
generic principle, out of which branch all the other beauties of the 
gospel system. 

To say, then, that abolitionists claim too much prominence for 
their principles, when they ask for the same privileges and rights for 
the negro which are readily granted to the white man, and which 
Heaven has given to both, is disgraceful to a holy religion, and a 
libel on the character of Jehovah. 

To talk of using 'discretion and judgment' in returning these ori- 
ginal and inherent rights to their owners, is like temporizing with the 
sinner when hell with its terrors roars beneath his feet. 

To talk of abolition ' claiming prominence over the doctrines and 
duties of religion,' is the highth of absurdity and the superlative of 
nonsense. The exercise of the one is the exercise of the other— 
they are one and inseparable. 

In relation to the prediction * that a church will never enjoy a re. 
vival of religion until they admit the claims of the slave,' it would be 
well for tiie gentleman to consider facts on the subject. True, it 
would be somewhat preposterous to say that unconditional barrenness 
would curse a church, unless most of its members were ^technical 
abolitionists ; ' but, on the other hand, it is equally true, that in revi- 
vals, church members generally have more of the pure spirit of abo- 



* To prove this assertion, let me refer the reader to the following extract from 
the ' Report of the Synod of S^uth Carolina and Georgia,' published in the Charles, 
ton Observer, March' 22, 153-1:— 

' From long continued and close observation, we believe that their [slave?'] moral 
and religious condition is such as that they may justly be considered heathen of 
this Christian country, and will bear comparison with leilhenivn in any part of 
the world.' ' Not one twentieth part attend divine worship on the Sabbath.' 

2 



10 

litionism, and there is less respect of persons and more love for suf- 
fering humanity exhibited, than at any other time. And again, it is 
equally true, no church ever prospers without admitting abolition 
principles in the main. But if we would see the effects of pro- 
slavery influence, we must look to the South. Moral desolation broods 
like the spirit of night, over the land. The angel of destruction has 
passed over it and infused into the air the ingredients of moral poison. 
The voice of blood cries from the ground, and the Genius of Religion 
has taken its flight, and, like another Sodom, the sins of its people 
cry for vengeance. Churches are blighted, unholy sacrifices oflfered 
on Jehovah's altar, and the walls of his house arc bedaubed with un- 
tempered mortar. Within the very precincts of southern churches, 
are nearly three millions of wretched and degraded heathen — miser- 
able, forlorn outcasts. Tell me, if pure and undefiled religion has its 
Beat amid such moral ruin. When the rose blossoms in the desert, 
or the sower reaps his harvest from the icebergs, then may religion 
flourish, paralyzed by the poisonous breath of slavery. The present 
state of southern churches furnishes a humiliating spectacle to the 
world as well as a convincing one, that religion and slavery are in- 
compatible. 

The same effects are seen at the North in the same proportion as 
the influence of slavery has been felt. In many churches religion 
has become merely nominal and their light obscured, while in others 
it burns dimly and their influence is small. On the other hand, it is 
a fact, that most of those churches which have admitted the claims 
of the slave, have had precious and repeated revivals of religion ; — 
and religion no where exists in such purity as it does in some of our 
western anti-slavery churches. 

These things are not only reasonable, but matters of fact, which 
the statistics of these churches ably sustain. In view of these facts, 
it would be well, if the gentleman would study the welfare of his Zion, 
to 'remember them that are in bonds as bound with them.'* 



* Tl e gentleman, in conclndint]: Iiis point, ns the reader will perceive, asFerts ' that 
many have wiilKlrawn from all other objects and devoted iheniFelves to this.' Per- 
haps he had a case in his mind at the time, but I do not know and have not heard 
of any such instance. At all events no one will pretend to justify an individual in 
withdrawing altogether from one good cause, to subserve entirely t!ie interests of 
another. 



11 

SECOND OBJECTION.* 

I am opposed to modern abolitionists, because they are opposed to 

the cause of colonization. To give you the object and views of 

this society, you will permit me to give an extract from an English 

abolitionist, Rev. Dr. Reed, who visited our churches a few years ago.f 

I may not be prepared to subscribe to all the tenets and measures of 

the Colonization Society ; but I am a decided friend to the great de. 

sign it has in view. Its object is to remove all the colored people 

who desire to go, to their own country. They have already returned 

thousands, who are blessing with religion and civilization the benighted 

continent of Afiica. We stole the colored man from his father's 

country, and if he desire it, we will take him to the continent from 

which we brought him. We return him, blessed with religion and 

the arts of civilized life. This is restoring him four-fold for what we 

have taken. 

The Colonization Society regard him here as suffering under a 

wicked prejudice. He is thus debased, forsaken, and as it were alone. 
They take him from this land of strangers and prejudice, and return 
him to his native soil to exert a great influence on the dark spots of 
Africa. 

But abolitionists have taken a great dislike to this scheme ; they 

* This is not the next point in order as the gentleman delivered it, but is insert«d 
next for special reasons. 

t The followino; is the estract alluded to in the above. This is only a very small 
part of what Dr. Reed says in regard to the Colonization Society. He gives what is 
the 'ostensible object,' while he disapproves of it in most intelligible terms. 

' The more ostensible means for their relief, which have been created by the forca 
of public opinion, are to be found in the Colonization and Anti-Slavery Societies. — 
The Colonization Society is the elder of the two, and originated in a pure motive of 
compassion for the slave. It proposes to establish a free colony on the coast of Af- 
rica, and by this means to confer a benefit on a country which has been wasted by 
our crimes, and to open a channel to the slaveholder to give freedom to his slaves. 
Its founders hoped that the movement thus made, while it brought the direct blessing 
of libertv to many, would indirectly, and without stimulating the prejudices of the 
planter, "familiarize the common mind with the inherent evils of slavery, and thus 
contribute to ultimate emancipation. For many years this was the best and the only 
remedy offered to public attention, and the benevolent, of course, took hold of it; 
and it has at present (1835) the concurrence of New England, and of the intelli. 
gent and influential in most places.' 

In another paragraph Mr. Reed remarks : — 

' The Colonization Society may have been well as a harbinger of something bet- 
ter ; but it was never equal to the object of emancipation, and is now below th» 
spirit and demands of the day.' * * ' It has lost a great measure of public con. 
fidence.' * * ' As a re?ne% for slavery, it must be placed amongst the grossest 
of all delusions. In fifteen years it has transported less than three thousand per- 
sons to the African coast ; while the increase on their numbers, in the stime period, 
is about seven hundred thousand ! By all means let the Colonization Society exist, 
if it will, as a Missionary Society for the benefit of Africa ; but, in the name of com. 
nlon honesty and common sense, let it disabuse the publi# mind, by avowing that 
ii d^es oat pretead to be a remedy for slax^ery.' 



call it pro-slavery, because they will not denounce slavery as much 
and as long as abolitionists do, because they receive the slaveholders 
into their ranks, and because, in one word, colonization is to abolition 
what Mordecai was to Haman. All the conduct of modern aboli- 
tionists, say they, can not live, unless colonization dies ! Hence, they 
have raged with the madness of the wildest mania against it. They 
have dug its grave again and again, and have as often chanted its 
faneral dirge ; yet, strange to tell, it lives and increases in stature and 
importance every day, while, as to its influence, the other is actually 
on the wane— the funds of the former increasing, while those of the 
latter are actually decreasing, 

REPLY. 

The gentleman, at first, was emphatic in expressing his abhorrence 
of slavery, but now asserts himself a decided friend to the great de. 
Bign of the Colonization Society—the legitimate child of slavery, and 
firmest pillar of oppression. It is founded upon prejudice, and nourished 
with its poison. Its design is, not to abolish slavery, but, on the other 
hand, its great object is ♦ to fortify that institution.'' It offl>.s not tho 
least hope to the slave, but wars against all his interests. 

Many, no doubt, are ready to question the assertion, that colonization 
was designed to support slavery ; but to prove this we need only tha 
declarations of colonizationists themsslres. 

Hon. H. A. Wise, of Virginia, a stanch and able defender of the 
original design of the Colonization Society, states thus :— 

*I became the zealous and active friend and advocate of the sreat 
ongmal principles o? the design to secure and foutifv the institS 
of slavery itself by colonizing the free people of color, parSS 
those of the slaveholding stales, on the shores of Africa.' ^'''''^^^"' ^^ 

Indeed, it never so much as hints at the abolition of slavery in anv 
one of the articles of its Constitution. The second article, which 
States the object of the society, reads thus : 

« The object to which its attention is to bo exclusively directed is to 
promote and execute a plan for colonizing (with their consent U?; f.fo 

lltVJr"^"' '"'f'irr ""''' °"" ^^'^"^'•y' i" ^'-<=-' or sJc other 
^It to Pf^Tfr '' K- *'" '^ •''" ™°^'' ^^P^^'^"^- -'^"^' the society shall 
act to effect his object, in co-operation with the general government 
and such of the states as may adopt regulations upon the subject!^ 

Here then, we have its object-to remove the free people of color, 
those free from slavery, into a strange land. To prove that it has not 
yet swerved from its first design, we adduce the following quotations 
from eminent colonizationists. And mark how studiedly they keep 



13 

aloof from the question of slavery. Speaking in reference to the 
Colonization Society, the Hon. Henry Clay, a slaveholder, and Pres- 
ident of the Society, says : — 

« It was not proposed to deliberate on, or consider at all, any ques. 
tion of emancipation, or that was connected with the abolition of 
slavery.' 

* The Society aims at the removal of the free persons of color. It 
interferes in no way whatever tcith the rights of property.^ — [Soeech 
of G. W. Curtis.] 

' So far from being connected with the abolition of slavery, the 
measure proposed would prove one of the greatest securities to enable 
the master to keep m possession his own property.' — [John Randolph.] 

' Our Society has nothing to do directly with the question of slave, 
ry.' — [Gerrit Smith, Esq.] 

* It interferes in no case with the right of property.'' — [African Re- 
pository, vol. i. p. a9.] 

'Their [colonizationists'] operations have been confined to the 
single object — colonization. Tney do nothing directly to effect the 
manumission of slaves.' — [Mr. Key's Address.] 

Please pay particular attention to the two following and last quo- 
tations on this point : — 

'The Am.erican Colonization Society has, at all times, solemnly 
disavowed any purpose of interference with the institutions or rights 
of our southern communities.' — [African Repository, vol. v. p. 387.] 

* It is not the object of this Soc'ety to libarate slaves or touch the 
rights of property.' — [Roport of Kentucky Col. S., A. R., page 81.] 

From the above — the testimony of colonizationists — it ray be 
plainly s32n that it is no ohJ3ct of tho Colonization Socie-y to ameli- 
orats tho CDnd.f.on of tho slave. Bat, on the other hand, it is one of 
tha greatest barriers to imn:;diate emancipation. It not only thus 
obsequiously pledges itself not to meddle with the ' domestic institu- 
tions of the South,' but in a base and cowardly manner promises not 
to make any efforts to destroy that wicked prejudice against the ne. 
gro, which grinds him in the dust. To prove this, read the following 
from one of its leading members, Mr. Archer, of Virginia : — 

« The object, if he understood it right, involved no intrusion on 
property, nor evi;x upon tkejudice.' It promises ' to consult the 
wishes and respect the prejudices of the South,' and promises tho 
utmost protection to slavery — a system full of blood, or what the im- 
mortal Wilberforce calls, ' the full measure of pure, unmixed, unso- 
phisticated wickedness.' 

How then can a minister of the gospel give his support to a societ/ 



14 

of this kind — one that not only stamps its seal of approbation upon 
an institution wicked as it is cruel, but pledges itself to frown upon, 
or, to use the exact words. ' to pass a censure upon abolition so- 
cieties in America.' Is it possible that tiie pulpit is thus false to its 
trust? Alas! 'Truth has fallen in the streets, and equity cannot 
enter.' 

Tiie gentleman first daclaring his abo:nination of slavery — then 
railing against a society, the express obJ3ct of which is to abolish it 
— then a decided friend to a society which doss not even pretend to 
such an object. ' O ! consistency, thou art a jewel ! ' 

If th3 gentleman is a real and not a pretended friend to the cause 
of human rights, common honesty will force him to take a stand with 
the abolitionists. 

Daring the time Avhlch that society has been in operation, it has 
hardly brought one slaveholder to repentance, or removed one half 
even of the superannuated slaves. But fetters have been riveted on 
thousands — aye, millions. 

But, the gentleman may say, this is a ' tenet ' which he can not 
subscribe to. Yet this is the leading characteristic of that society, 
anl its grand design is, from the testimony of its own members, ' to 
for!;ify the institution of slavery.' 

Again — it is stated, ' their [colonizatlonists'] object is to remove 
all tlie colored people who desire to go ' &c. ; that is, a free man 
must consent either to a hori-id system of expatriation, or remain in 
his own land and be abused, insulted, and even enslaved. This is the 
beauty — or I might, in the inllated style of its advocates, call it ' the 
circle of philanthropy.' It is benevolence of a very romantic char. 
acter ; it is subserving the ' cause of liberty, of humanity, of religion,' 
with a vengeance ! 

Bat the Colonization Society is basely hypocritical, or, in the Ian 
gaage of Garrison, 'a creature without heart, without brains, eyeless, 
unnatural, hypocritical, relentless and unjust.' True, its ostensible 
purpose is ' to remove the free people of color with their consent ; ' 
but in fact it is very different. It is by force that these miserable 
beings are to be removed, and it is nothing but bare-faced hypocrisy 
to pretend to do it any other way. Colonizatlonists, if they have not 
created, do maintain a wicked, wide-spread and deep-rooted prejudice 
against the colored man ; and by it he has been persecuted, and his 
life blood sought after. It has united the slavcdcaler, recreant minis- 
ter and northern apologist together, and hunted him like a patridgc on 
the mountain, till, for the sake of peace, he would be compelled to go 



15 

to Africa. In nearly all the States, cruel laws are kept rigidly in 
force, depriving the black man of common privileges, and annihilating 
most of his home-bred rights. 

They are by law kept in ignorance and degradation, debarred from 
most of the schools, seminaries and colleges in the land. Even any 
attempt to instruct this unfortunate people, is met with the grossest 
insults and disrespect. Every onn will recollect what reckless hos- 
tility was vented against Miss Crandall, for desiring to set up a school 
for colored females in Canterbury ; also the breaking up of the school 
at Canaan, New Hampshire. 

But I do not mean to rest the ques'on on these circumstances 
merely. The testimony of colonizationists to prove that the phrase 
* with their consent ' is nothing but sounding words, is conclusive. 
Hear the report of a slaveholder : — 

' Colonization in Africa has been proposed to the free colored 
people ; to forward which, a general system of persecution against 
them, iqiheld from the pulpit, has been legalized throughout the 
soutbern states.' 

Hon. Mr. Broadnax, of Virginia, too, honestly says r 

' It is idle to talk about not resorting to force. If the free negroes 
are willing to go, they wdl go. If not willing, they must be compelled 
to go.' 

Again — mark with what familiarity and confidence the same gen- 
tleman speaks on the subject ; it is true colonization : — 

' Who does not know that when a free negro, by crime or other- 
wise, has rendered himself obnoxious to a neighborhood, how easy it 

IS to visit him some night, take IIIM from niS BED AND FAMILY, 
AND APPLY TO HIM THE GENTLE ADMONITION OF A SEVERE FLAGEL- 
LATION, to induce him to go away.' 

Again — 

' I have certainly heaid, that all the large cargoes of emigrants, 
lately transported from this country to Liberia, all of whom professed 
to be willing to go, were rendered so by tome such ministration.^ 

Says Mr. Breckinridge : — 

' They sent out two ship-loads of vagabonds, {missionaries !) not 
fit to go to such a place ; an 1 they were coerced away, as truly as if 
it had been done with a cart- whip.' 

Thus much for the charity of the colonizationists. Their object is 
to drive, aye, to lash, if need be, the free colored American into Libe- 
ria, or some other barren or burnt district of the world. The thing 
is, to get them out of the way ; the welfare of the negro is not con- 
suited at all. Here they are nothing but ' chattels ; ' move them 
to jl/rica, makes these «<^zn^5' heralds of salvation. Banish them — • 



16 

like the wicked Jews th(y cry, ' away with them, away with them.* 
This is colonization, conceived in, and brought forth full-grown from 
perdition. 

But, says the gentleman, « they have already returned thousands, 
who are blessing with religion and civilization the benighted continent 
Of Africa.' 

He is certainly not a very attentive reader of colonization publica- 
tions. One of them states,* that 'cargoes of these emigrants have 
been thrown ashore, without shelter or efficient medical aid, to die by 
scores ! ' The legitimate residta of such foreign colonization has been 
disastrous in the extreme. A deadly hostility between the natives 
and the emigrants ha3 exicted, and has desolated again and aga'n the 
colony. The poor natives have been cheated and murdered by the 
colonists. The history of the King Joe Harris' war is familiar to 
most of us — a v.ar cliaracterized by the most savage cruelty and 
injustice. We well remember the horrib'e account of another war, 
given by Rev. Mr. Ashmun, which cannot be described better than 
in his own words. Speaking of the natives, he says : — 

* Eight hundred men were here placed shoulder to shoulder, in so 
compact a tbi-m that a child might easily walk upon their heads, from 
one end of the mass to the other, presentiiig in their rear a breadth of 
rank equal to twenty or thirty men, and all exposed to a gun of great 
power, raised on a platform, at only thirty to sixty yards distarcc. 
Every shot literally s-pent its force in a solid mass of living human 
flesh! ' Is there moral power in ' cannon balls, guns, gun-powder, and 
rum, spear-pointed knives and cutlasses,' that will christianize Af- 
rica ? What downright wholesale murder ! Yet its authors are those 
who, as the gentleman says, are blessing Africa with religion ! Oh ! 
how men will degrade that religion which is so exalted, heavenly, 
pure, and which 'worketh no ill.' Those whom Henry Clay teims 
♦ nuisances,' Mr. Breckenridge 'vagabonds,' are to be evangelists to 
Africa, to reform the natives, who, from the testimony of colonization- 
ists themselves, are hardly as ' degraded ' and 'vicious' as the free 
colored people. 

Tiiose who are here ' lawless,^ ' revengeful.'' ' citt-ihroaV .\s\\, and, 
by some profound physiologists, the connecting link between the 
ourang-oulang and humanity, ' the most corrupt, depraved, and aban. 
doncd,' ♦ stirrers-up of sedition and insurrection,' are to be il/mz'on- 
aries ! They are to be made pious, humane, mild, devoted, industri- 

* Liberia Herald, August. 1837. 



11 

ouB, and dignified, by transportation, or some other salt-water process. 
What confusion worse confounded ! But who are to support 75,000 
missionaries per year ? [This is the annual increase of the free color- 
ed and slave population.] Who are to furnish 8125,000,000— tho 
minimum, to colonize twr and a half millions of people in Africa ? — 
No small sura, indeed.' 

But let us exani'-ne colonization statements in reference to the op- 
eration of the gentleman. 

Almost the first intelligence from the colony is, that ' ignorance and 
an invincible prejudice had wrought up ' these pious missionaries, * to 
a blind and furious excitement of the worst passions,' and they ' were 
obliged to taste some of the bitter fruits of 'anarchy,' and barely < es- 
caped those tragedies of blood (!) which can find no parallel, but in 
the history of the civil murders and devastations of St. Domingo.* 
This is colonization — civilization ! But soon the intelligence comes, 
the missionaries have become apostates, and ' there must be a great 
revolution before it [the colony] can have a salutary influence on tho 
surrounding natives.' Next, we hear they must < have a work-house 
for confining licentious females, and other disorderly and lazy persons.* 
Next, ' the natives are disgusted with their immoralities.' Next, ' the 
colony is flooded with a great number of ignorant and abandoned 
characters.' Next, the missionaries have thrown aside their Bibles 
and tracts, ' and they are either used as waste paper, or made food for 
worms.' ' Soon, however, the curtain falls, and the fantastic scene i$) 
ended.' Mr. Pinney, the agent at Liberia, frankly states, that after 
some fifteen or twenty years, ' nothing has been done for the natives 
hitherto, by the colonists, except to educate a few who are in their 
families in the capacity of servants.' (Wonder if tlaey were not 
slaves ?) 

But the trickery of the scene, and the secrets of this modem 
inquisition house, are not all yet discovered. Many of the colonists 
have turned slaveholders, aa'd tradesme:m in human flesh. 
Chief Justice Jefcott, of Sierra Leone, stated in 1830, 'that the colony 
established for the express purpose of suppressing this vile traffick, 
was m.ade a mart for carrying it on ; ' also, ' that within the last ten 
years, twenty-tvvo thousand Africans had been located in the colony 
by Britain, and that now there are not to be found in the colony, 
above seventeen or eighteen thousand men.' Thus leaving between 
four and five thousand to be carried off by disease, * in a healthful 
and salubrious climate,^ or Iddnapped and exported by slave-dealing 
missionaries. It is reported, that in 1833, 'one of the schoolmastors 

8 



18 

in Sierra Leone was tried for selling some of his scholars ! ' {Peda- 
gogue 'philanthropy, forsooth. 'The stupid blockheads can not learn 
teven in Sierra Leone.') The slave-trade has actually been carried 
on with great activity, and ' slave factoxies are established in the im- 
mediate vicinity.' This is the way they are christianizing Africa. 
Yet, in the very teeth of these facts, all of them stated by coloniza- 
tionists, the gentleman declares to his audience, iViat they are blessing 
Africa with religion and civilization. How skilled is the reverend 
author in the ' mysteries ' of the Colonization Society \ What an 
argument against the measures of the abolitionists ! Oh ! reason, 
methinks thou art truly tortured. This is logic with a witness, and 
would disgrace even a country school-boy. Sophistry and nonsense, 
which require no extra length of vision to see through. 

But hear another remark — an outrage on our common humanity — 
the expatriation of the colored American is a ^ four -fold gratuity.'' 
Reader, mark this avowal of hard-heartedness and tyranny, which 
would look out of countenance the southern slave-driver. A ^Jour- 
fold gratuity ' to enslave the father and his children, until both are 
superannuated and worn out with toil, and then banish them to Libe- 
ria. A ' gratuity ' to place the slave between two alternatives, either 
of which is the extreme of cruelty ; to give the colored man a 
choice, either to be transported to the sickly and pestilential climate 
of Africa, and suffer the horrors of starvation and the untold evils of 
that desert land, or remain in his own country, abused, insulted, and 
down-trodden. Is this a ^gratuity 7 ' Surely the gentleman has given 
us a gratuitous definition of this word. He is quite an adept in the 
science of hermeneutics. 

The colonizationists have no more right to ask the colored man to 
emigrate to Africa, than the colored people have to ask the whites to 
remove to England, Ireland, Scotland, Germany, France, or to any 
other country from which their ancestors emigrated. So that, if the 
colored population should gain the ascendency, the logic of coloniza- 
tionists would lead them at once to colonize the whites, and drive 
them out of the land. 

It assists the gentleman very little to bring forward the prejudice 
which exists against the colored man. That all must admit to be 
wicked ; and to encourage colonization, is to encourage that prejudice. 

But who are they who are so prejudiced against the negro ? AU 
most invariably they are found to be colonizationists ; and they have 
a dogma peculiarly their own — Hhey can not rise here J* Why ? Be- 
cause they [colonizationists] will not suffer them. All their measures- 



19 

amount in the end to this. AboUtionists treat the colored man as a 
brother, and labor to remove the obstacles which prevent him from 

* risin» ' — to have those laws repealed that are cruel and oppressive. 
But the dof^matical colonizationist immediately denounces them as 

* fanatics,' < cut-throats,' 'incendiaries,' and 'amalgamators,' and 
brands them with every other vile epithet which their mother tongue 
affords. Here then it amounts to selfishness ; — because they have a 
prejudice, every one must submit to its fastidiousness, and the free 
colored man must be banished to Liberia ! This is a kind of squeara- 
ishness which all can not humor. 

But why all this declamation about their ' native soil ? ' Does it 
require argument to prove, that America is the land of the American 
slave ? Can a man not lay claim to the air he first breathes — to the 
•earth he first treads ? On this principle, the phrase American citizen 
is entirely superfluous and unmeaning ; we are all foreigners and 
sojourners in a strange land. The dignity of citizenship is destroyed, 
and the gentleman himself must go seek the home of his fathers. 

But passing by ' Mordecai ' and ' Haman,' (may their spirits for- 
give the indignity,) whom the gentleman has so unceremoniously 
introduced to his audience, and the inference drawn from the conduct 
of the abolitionists, he says that colonization is 'increasing,' and 
abolition on the 'wane.' To discover how far this statement is true, 
let us examine the latest statistics of both. 

First, colonization is increasing. In point of influence, it is noto- 
rious that much of it is lost at the North, while at the South slave- 
holders are its foremost supporters. ]\Iany, of the first respectability, 
have left their ranks within a few years, among whom may be men- 
tioned Gerrit Smith, Esq., Dr. Cox, Arthur Tappan, Pres. Green, 
"W. L. Garrison, and many others, who are now the pillars of the 
anti-slavery cause. Citizens are losing all interest in the operations 
<of colonization, and in many places are becoming disgusted with it. 
As an instance, attempts were lately made to form a Colonization So- 
ciety in Oneida county, which, after some unsuccessful efforts, ter- 
minated in what may be called a ' complete failure.' In point of 
funds, I know of no association more bankrupt. R. R. Gurley, Sec- 
retary of the American Society, states at Washington, June 1838, 
that ' the wants of the society are most urgent. We have a letter 
before us, from the family of one of the physicians in Liberia, (who 
has gone a third time to that colony from motives of benevolence,) that 
are left entirely dependent for support on the salary of the husband and 
father, soliciting with the importunity of distress, the remittance of 



20 

a amall amount which has been due for several weeks ; but the society 
HAS NOT A DOLLAR in the treasui'v to meet the f'»^'-nr<nd.' Says a 
writer in the New York Evangelist : 'The contributions and dona- 
tions in Connecticut for the past years, have averaged more than 
$1400 annually, to the Colonization Society ; the last year less than 
8200.' And Connecticut, until lately, has been firm in its support of 
colonization. Instances need not be multiplied to show how far we 
can rely upon the gentleman's statements. 

•The other [abolition] is actually on the wane.' This is one of 
those stereotyped falsehoods, which abolition opposers dwell upon with 
much gusto. How far the charge is true, will be seen from the move- 
ments of the New York State Anti-Slavery Society, at its last annual 
meeting. At this convention, which was of thrilling interest, and 
held in the same church from which, in 1833, abolitionists were driven 
by an infuriated mob, ' the pledge from responsible sources, and the 
collections in cash, amounted to ten thousand dollars — four 
THOUSAND or morc of which vi'as paid down, and much of it subscribed 
on the permanent quarterly plan.' Last year the funds raised by the 
same society at its annual meeting, held in the same place, amounted 
to less than/owr ihousand dollars. <■ In the course of the meeting the 
project of a new paper was brought forward, and subscriptions were 
obtained to the number of thirteen thousand copies per annum.' 
The cause is making like progress in most of the other northern 
states, as in the empire ttaie. Now, the statements of the Rev. gen- 
tleman are admirable presentations of truth !— admirable specimens 
of the fairness and honesty of abolition opponents ! If this is the 
way abolition is on the ' wane,' the resurrection will call forth the 
Rev. Sir from his ' narrow home,' to preach its fimeral discourse. — 
So moral truth has ever been dying away since the days of Christ. 
Colonization, since it is in the hands of slaveholders, may live until 
slavery is abolished, but that period is evidently fast hastening ;— 
' hie jack ' will soon be inscribed on the tomb-stone of priest-ridden and 
bed-ridden colonization, nearest relative of 'granny slavery,' 
whose obituary in the West India Islands, has been noticed in most of 
the anti-slavcry papers. It is not necessary to draw any comparison 
between the two societies. Colonization, a composition of the most 
heartless professions and love-forced lying promises, and of its 
father the devil, who was a liar f\-om the beginning, is aptly described 
by Pres. Green as being 'a pitiful, scare-crow likeness of American 
slavery— a mere sham.' Oh ! what, folly !— what a compound to tor- 
ture humanity ! 



21 

' Men who ask our lives to stake, 
111 ' Afi-ic's clime ' to roam, 
^ .sclose their friendship like a snake ! 
By biting us at home.'* 

Oh ! it is base, diabolical, infamous, to drive a man from his country 
because he is tinged with a color different from our own ! — thus to 
blight the hope yet lingering in the bosom of the negro ; thus to 
breathe a cold mist over the soul, and cause the iftuntain of life to freeze 
'4ip ! Oh ! the man who thus loves his fellow — 

' Living, shall forfeit fair renown, 
And, doubly dying, shall go down 
To the vile dust from whence he sprung, 
Unwept, unhonored, and unsung.' 

THIRD OBJECTION. 

Again — I object to the course of modern abolitionists, because it is 
■calculated to defeat the very object which they wish to secure. But 
it appears to us, that they are only riveting the chains which they 
wish to sever. So much coercion has marked their way, that the ears 
of thousands are now closed to all pleas in behalf of the poor degraded 
slave. I hesitate not to say, that the best cause in the world would 
be ruined by the very course that abolitionists are now pursuing. 
The ears of the South are now closed against us on the subject of ab- 
olition, and it is impossible to produce an impression there in favor of 
emancipation. Abolition unkindness has driven them off. They will 
neither hear nor read on this subject at present. * * * * jj- jjg^g 
stopped the ears of the South. Kentucky, Virginia, and Maryland, 
those prominent states of the confederacy, who were on the very eve of 
abolishing slavery from their soil, are driven back by abolition fanati- 
cism half a century in the degradation of slavery. f ***** 
Several years ago, the General Assembly of the Presbyterian church 
passed resolutions against slavery as a sin ; — strong measures have 
been recommended to rescind them. The New York General Con- 
ference have passed strong resolutions forbidding their ministers to 
join their [abolitionists'] ranks, or to speak out on this subject in 
the pulpits. Let abolitionists remember they are accountable to God 
for all the injury they have done the poor slave. They profess to us to 



* A colored man spealdng in reference to the Colonization Society. How much 
they want to go to Africa I 

+ This paragraph was stated in another connection ; but it corresponds so well 
with this head, that both are answered together. 



22 

have a design to elevate the oppressed ; but they bind tighter their 
bonds. May God forgive them.* 

REPLY. 

The gentleman would fain here have us to understand, that he op- 
poses the abolitionists out of pure love to the slave. This, for the 
sake of rarity, we will call love in the abstract. The cry is, * the 
measures.' ' the measures ! ' Opponents of abolition dare not for con- 
science' sake attack either of the fundamental or general principles 
on which it rests. So v/ith slaveholders themselves ; they dare not so 
insult the majesty of Heaven as to make a pro-slavery prayer. The 
northern apologist, wicked as he is, never prays that Jehovah would 
crush the principles of abolition, but he will pray that its ' dangerous 
measures ' may be arrested. What real Jesuitical cunning and hy- 
pocrisy ! But anti-abolitionists, as much as they denounce ' meas- 
ures,' can not point out a solitary measure which will not stand the 
test of reason and the Bible. The Rev. gentleman before us, does not 
even attempt to prove his assertion, but passes it off with an ' it 
appears to us,' and two historical facts, as irrelevant as two quotations 
from Rollin. He presents us with a train of audacious operations, 
sustained only by his ipse dixit. Some of them, indeed, would even 
stretch credulity itself, and put common sense to shame. 

In relation to the two facts brought forward, if they prove any 
thing, they demonstrate conclusively, that those two bodies were 
lamentably corrupt, and that many of their members have ' bowed the 
knee to Baal.' Indeed, in regard to one of them, the attempts which 
have been made are not so singular, since for several sittings, the 
General Assembly of the Presbyterian church has had for its Modera- 
tor a slaveholder ! And every one knows, who knows any thing in 
regard to Methodism, that the present sect under the name of Method, 
ists have very little of the spirit of John Wesley, their founder, who 
was very fanatical on the subject of slavery. These two facts the 
gentleman has brought out, and they are very important to the point 
to which they lean, viz. to expose the corruptions of the American 
churches. 



* It must here be acknowledged, that the Rev. gentlcnian and tfae editor of the 
Colonization Herald, have very wonderfully brought forth the same idea, expressed 
in nearly the same words. Perhaps the editor has had the privilege of the gentle- 
man's manuscript — otherwise the gentleman may have had the benefit of the printed 
editorial. 

The Herald says , ' We conclude by saying, may the Lord forgive tou — may 
the sons of Africa forgive you, as an association of the most designing hypocrites 
and senseless fanatics that ever troubled a nation's peace, and periled and disgraced 
a noble cause.' 



23 

A religiou3 body at or about Rhinebeck's with a minister at its 
head, lately passed some resolutions against the American Temperance' 
Societ)' ; but does this prove that that society is < defeating the very 
object which it wishes to secure ? ' 

The General Assembly passed a resolution to excind a number of 
Synods and Presbyteries, because they adopted what are called ' new 
measures;' but does this prove that these <new measures' will not 
be instrumental in saving souls ? It is absurd thus to reason ; such 
things are wrong, and God will bring their ' wickedness to nought.' 

But < coercion has marked their way,' &c. What is it that the 
gentleman calls ' coercion ? ' Why, abolitionists have exercised their 
inalienable rights, by protesting against sin, that most abominable 
sin — slavery. Because they have exerted a combined and individual 
influence against this ; because they have used the elective franchise 
for its abolition ; because, by the press, they have exposed the secrets 
of this great Bastile, and from it scattered leaves of light and truth 
in relation to its evils ; and because they continue to do this — ' coer- 
cion marks their way.' This same coercion has led on the Temperance 
Reform to glorious results ; this same coercion is leading forward 
Moral Reform ; this same coercion, used by the immortal Luther, 
broke the spell of Papacy ; this same coercion has marked Christianity 
in every step she has taken from the Christian era until the present 
time. It is Christianity thus to attack and expose sin. This coercion 
-is moral power, wielded by moral agents, to destroy moral evil, and 
its blow is more fatal than the stroke of carnal weapons. 

Abolitionists are most distinct in disclaiming any thing like physical 
force to attain their object. To sustain this, let me refer to the Con- 
stitution of the New York State Anti-Slavery Society : — 

' Article 10. The object of this society is the entire abolition of 
slavery in the United States. While it admits that each state alone 
has, by the Constitution of the United States, the exclusive right to 
legislate in regard to its abolition in said state, yet its aim shall be to 
convince all men, by arguments addressed to their understandings and 
consciences, that slaveholding is a heinous crime in the sight of God, 
and that the duty, safety, and best interest of all concerned, require its 
immediate abandonment. 

' This society shall aim to elevate the character and condition of 
the people of color ' — how ? — ' by encouraging their intellectual, moral 
and religious. improveme7it, and by correcting the prejudice of public 
opinion ; but this society will never, in any way, countenance the 
oppressed in vindicating their rights by resorting to physical force.' 

These are the principles on which abolitionists act. They are ac- 
countable for the results of no other ; and whether they would ruin 



54 

• the very best cause in the world,' or not, is alone for the logical gfeli'- 
tleinan to demonstrate. To say that the ' coercion ' of abolitionists in 
other than the constraining power of truth, is, in all its particularSj. 
false, and unworthy the head or heart of an honest man. 

The gentleman again makes a tissue of naked assertions, which, as 
it is a professed declaration of fact, we will endeavor to prove false, 
viz : ' the ears of the South are now closed,' &c. Strange it is, that 
he has not yet learned thos^ corrtiaon events which are as familiar to 
abolitionists as the Englisht alphabet. He has not yet heard of the 
' Elmore correspondence,' or a Correspondence between a United States 
Senator from South Carolina, and one of the Corresponding Secreta- 
ries of • the Anti-Slavery Societ}^. The same Senator sent a request 
to the anti-slavery office in New York, for a copy of all the publica- 
tions of that society, which was granted. Soon after another request 
came from the same Senator for another set of publications for an 
intimate friend, supposed to be J. C. Calhoun. All this too, from the 
-very hot-bed of slavery. A blessed reaction is taking place in that 
state, and a desire to examine and investigate anti-slavery principles, 
is very prevalent. Kentucky, which fhe gentleman says has been put 
back half a century, is almost half abolitionized. Fifteen thou- 
sand or more signed a call for a Convention to consider measures for 
the abolition of slavery in that state. An Anti-Slavery Society has 
been formed in Maryland, which his been put back the same length of 
time by ' abolition fanaticism.' And the leaven, we doubt not, is 
working in Virginia, and through all the southern states. A St. 
Louis paper, and the ' Arkansas State Gazette,' published the emanci- 
pation in the West Indies. The journal of Thome and Kimball is 
eagerly sought after, and read with interest. Slaveholders themselves 
visiting the North, on their return stop at the anti-slavery office in 
New York, to look at the incendiary prints, and study ' abolition fa- 
naticism ! ' Some have even placed their sons in an institution at the 
North, which many call the 'hot-bed of sedition.'* These are undis. 
puted facts ; and is the gentleman correct in saying the * ears of the 
South are closed,' and that ' it is impossible to produce an impression 
upon them,' &c. ? Abolitionists are not such objects of hate, even to 
the slaveholder, as they are to the Northern apologist, and for evid^it 
reasons. Instances repeatedly occur of slaveholders, and men in 
slaveholding states, writing letters to abolitionists at the North, exhort, 
ing them to go forward, with the importunity of dying men. Gerrit 



* There is now at the Oneida Institute, the son of a slaveholdor from Florida, 



25 

Smith, Esq., states in a letter to the editor of the Friend of Man, 
* that our peaceful and holy principles are making progress at the 
South. Numbers of southern men write me so. Already we have 
true-hearted abohtionists in all the states. * * * One of them 
attended the anniversary of our State Anti-SIavery Society a year 
ago, and emancipated his slaves shortly after reaching his home in 
Louisiana. * * * Another gentleman of Louisiana attended the 
last anniversary of our society, and at the close of it introduced him- 
self to me — admitted that he had been mistaken as to the character of 
abolition, and requested copies of our anti-slavery publications to take 
to the South with him.' A slaveholder, in a letter to the same gentle, 
man, writes thus : ' O my God, hasten aholition, that the time may soon 
come, when there shall not he a bond-slave in the United States — no, 
not in the whole globe.' Another gentleman at the South, in writing 
a letter to his brother at the North, says : ' Say to the abolitio-vists 
OF THE North, go on, and not cease your efforts until every 
SLAVE is free.' He says again: ^Several of his friends are giving 
freedom to their slaves for conscience' saTceJ' Thus, in viev/ of these 
facts, the gentleman has stated, « the ears of the South are closed on 
the subject.' Wliat a miserable subterfuge, to misrepresent things in 
this mannei", and thus dupe the uninformed ! 

■ < But they profess to us,' &:c. Tiie English of this is, that tha 
Anti-Slavery Society is either a great congregation of hypocrites and 
reckless fanatics, or gross ignoramuses. What does the gentleman 
mean 1 Is this a mere passing sarcasm, or has he assumed omnipo- 
iency, and judges his fellow men ? Does he claim a prerogative of 
Jehovah, and has he scanned the secrets of the soul, and found out the 
hidden springs of action 1 It is indeed astounding ! What a flatulent, 
windy declaration ! What a laborious process of reasoning it required 
to bring the gentleman to the conclusion, that abolitionists are ac- 
countable beings i Yet he states it with as much sangfroid as if it was 
a novel discovery. Had abolitionists, in their 'course,' exhibited a 
tithe as much of ' denunciation,' ' censoriousness,' and ' fanaticism,' as 
has been exhibited, as yet, in this discourse, I would sincerely pity 
them, and add my hearty ' amen ' to his prayer. But when such wick- 
ed taunts, such intolerable distortion and wholesale misrepresentation, 
such insults to humanity and men who dlfTer in opinion, are exhibited, 
we are constrained to pray, ' God forgive their authors.' If abolition- 
ists should take the course of their opponents, and render quid pro quo 
the conduct and inconsistencies of some of them, they would be the^ 
scorn of sarcasm and jest of irony — the mock of religion and the 



26 

sneer of infidelity. If the gentleman was candid, why did he not 
treat the subject in an argumentative, reasonable, religious manner, 
and thus convince abolitionists of the ' error of their ways ? ' Is it 
christian-like thus to insult them ? If they are misguided, the tend, 
ency of this discourse, is to drive them on, and in the hight of des- 
peration to do much more injury. It is for any reader to say, whether 
this discourse originated out of love to the slave, or a wicked preju- 
dice against abolitionists and the object of their benevolent efforts? 

FOURTH OBJECTION. 

I object to the course of modern abolitionists, because they exhibit 
ft spirit of censoriousness and denunciation tov/ard those who differ 
from them, which is contrary to the spirit of Christ. 

There are many good men who feel conscientiously opposed to their 
measures. These men are right in principle on the subject of 
slavery ; they view it as a great evil and plead for emancipation. 
But they prefer to differ with modern abolitionists in the means and 
measures to accomplish this object. 

They can not give this subject the prominence which abolitionists 
do. What is the result? They are immediately denounced as pro- 
slavery, as upholding the slaveholder in trampling on the slave, as 
courting popularity, as afraid to come out against sin, and refusing to 
declare the whole counsel of God, as harboring a wicked prejudice 
against color ; and even the piety of churches has been called into 
question, because they do not come out flaming abolitionists. 

Like the misguided disciples, they are ready to say, ' Lord, wilt thou 
that we command fire to come down from heaven and consume them? ' 

This, if I mistake not, is the spirit of abolitionism ; such a spirit is 
at war with the genius of religion, as it is with the good of the poor 
slave. 

But, brethren, these are the champions of the 19th century — •the 
glorious self-styled and v/ould-be reformers ! 

FIFTH OBJECTION. 

I object to modern, abolition, because I am opposed to the violent 
and reckless measures which are employed to effect its object. 

The man who holds a slave is treated as the worst of all the earth. 
The inflated abolitionist stands at the North, say a thousand miles 
from the scene of action, and vociferates to the slaveholder, ' you 
manstealcr,' ' pirate,' ' thief,' ' worse than highway robber,' ' murder- 
«r ! ' Is this the way to convince a man of his sins and bring him to 



27 

repentance ? We have not so learned in the school of Christ. 3ow 
did Paul address the slaveholder ? — ' Beloved in the Lord,' ' believing 
masters,' 'brethren.' But Paul's hobby did not go fast enough for 
modern abolitionists ; they are for quicker work, and a shorter cut. 
Paul said, ' servants, be obedient to your masters ; ' — abolitionists say- 
in effect to them, 'rebel.' Paul called slaveholders * brethren;^ — 
modern abolitionists exclude them from all church fellowship, and cast 
tjiem out as thieves and robbers. * * * gut this reckless course 
has been the means of driving men of talents and piety from their 
ranks. Rev. Mr. Kirk, of Albany, and many more who were once 
with the abolitionists, have left them on this very ground. 

When I see such men as Edward N. Kirk, Lyman Beecher, Herman 
Norton, Jacob Helffenstein, and Joel Parker, directly opposed to the 
abolitionists, I am led seriously to look at their ways and measures, 
before I can fight under their flag. * * * gome of their most 
popular prints are now engaged in controversies with each other, in a 
mighty conflict of sentiment. One — the Liberator — denies the Bible, 
and does away with the Sabbath, and curses the clergy, while another 
pleads for them ; and among their ranks are to be found some, who 
wish even to destroy all governments unless they sustain the cause of 
abolition. It has recently been discovered by some of these wise 
men, that slavery exists in all the relations of life — the child is a slave 
to its parents ; our rulers are tyrants — their relations should be broken 
up. Women are said to be too much in bondage to their husbands — 
doomed to the kitchen and parlor for too many ages ; and by the aids 
of abolition champions, they are about to enter the forum, and stand 
in the a7'ena of strife. Their voice must be heard in our legislative 
halls and senate houses. Thus things are changing under the fanatical 
course of abolitionists. 



I bring these two objections together, as they may both properly 
come under the same head. True, this part is unworthy much reply ; 
it is one of those trite, worn-out objections, which are now numbered 
with the things which are not. Abolitionists are accused of being 
♦ denunciatory and censorious.' Their most sweeping denunciation 
ia, that slavery, under all circumstances, is a sin, and ' no possible con- 
tingency can make it right.' That this is true, has been long since 
proved and demonstrated. This being settled, they could not in chris- 
tian duty, but rebuke those who were implicated in its guilt. Slave- 
holders, as a matter of coui-se, have been censured sharply for their 



28 

abominable sins, and those who connive at them have aUke met witfr 
rebuke. This spirit, which is the spirit of Christ, has aroused th© 
mahgnity and liatred of slaveholders and anti-abolitionists, and they 
have literally gnashed with their teeth upon the apostles of liberty, as 
did the Jews on Peter. It certainly is not wrong to rebuke sin ; it 
certainly is wrong not to rebuke it. For consequences we are not 
responsible — they belong to God. 

But ' good men ' are denounced, &c. Who they are, the gentleman 
does not say — undoubtedly he includes himself. Who they can be,, 
can not even be surmised. Perhaps they are colonizationists ; — 
among tliem are many good men, who have their eyes blinded. But 
when abolitionists denounce the colonization society, they do it to a 
corporate body, but do not denounce those who conscientiously further 
its interests. Perhaps they are those who are not colonizationists, but 
who can not conscientiously go with the abolitionists in all their meas- 
ures. Such, abolitionists do not denounce. But when those who are 
professedly ' good men,' come out and brand abolitionists as ' innova- 
tors,' ' amalgamators,' ' fanatics,' &c., and apologize for slavery, such 
men abolitionists denounce. Is this a crime ? Abolitionists have 
ever in this particular acted only on the defensive. Their efforts have 
been to destroy slavery ; but its apologists have stepped in, and poured 
out their torrents of invective and obloquy upon their heads. Aboli- 
litionists have attacked slavery ; professedlj;' good men have assailed 
them, and nothing but self defence has caused them to proclaim to the 
world their true character. They have not 'recklessly' denounced 
any man, but they have denounced his sins and iniquities. The gen- 
tleman may then apply the ' blister ' to his own conscience, and see if 
there arc not reasons why he can be suspected of < harboring a wicked 
prejudice against color,' and < upholding the slaveholder in trampling 
on the slave.' 

To throw back then the charge in his own teeth, I ask, does he sup- 
pose that abolitionists have no ' conscience ? ' — that they have no 
* right principles ? ' Does he suppose he can heap upon them insult 
after insult, charge after charge, denunciation after denunciation, 
with impunity ? With great self-complacency he must imagine abo- 
litionists a weak-minded body. Sir, if it is no harm to apply scrip- 
ture to priesthood, ' pull the beam out of thine own eye,' and then ask 
thy brother to pull the mote out of his. . His strain of sarcasm at the 
close of this point,, is too insipid and harmless to attract notice. 

From the next point in connection ^vith this, it appears, that the 
gentleman is sadly vexed with a measure -phohia — betraying itself iu 



29 

ieuder and qfecthnate regard for the elareholder, but in reckless • de- 
nunciation ' towards abolitionists, ile complains because abolitionists 
call slaveholders menstealers, &c. Has the gentleman never called 
a drunkard a brute ? Has he never compared the rum-seller with tho 
most flagitious characters — even v, ith highway robbers and murder- 
ers ? Is stealing the bodies and souls of men a smaller crime then 
than dealing in ardent spirits ? If recklessness and violence consist 
in applying epithets, then the veritable author himself has taken little 
heed to his ways. The following qualifiers in reference to abolitionists 
are profusely scattered throughout his discourse, ' fanatics,' ' reckless,' 
'inflated,' 'denunciatory,' 'violent,' 'rancorous and full of hate,' 
* inflamed,' &c. This is modern anti-abolition forbearance and 
meekness ; and now, to use his own pointed logic, ' is this the way to 
convince a man of his sins and lead him to repentance ? ' I think 
not. Yet this is a species of hypocrisy, incessantly perpetra- 
ted by the enemies of abolition. A great noise is made if aboli- 
tionists call the slaveholder by the proper name (as I shall soon en. 
deavor to show,) of manstealer ; yet, at the same time, they will ti-eat 
abolitionists as the refuse of the earth, and heap upon them every 
kind of insult — and nothing is wrong ; they have the spirit of Christ 
and of Paul ! ' Oh, what arrant hypocrisy ! 

The gentleman appears to have the idea that abolitionists are ac- 
countable for the existence of words. Strange indeed ! He never 
attempts to prove that they are inappropriate, but condemns the abo- 
litionists for using them. The point then is, to prove that these terms 
properly belong to the slaveholders of the South. If these epithets 
are true as to the application which abolitionists have given them, 
this part of the objection has no force whatever. 

It is a fact long since settled, that the African slavetrade is man- 
stealing ; and all European writers have identified slaveholding with 
the slavetrade — especially Granville Sharp, Adam Clarke,* and John 
Wesley, of England, and I may add Jonathan Edwards and Samuel 
Hopkins, of our own country. 

Our law, as written in the statute book, is more decisive still, and 
designates the slavetrade by the term ^piracy,' or manstealing and 



* I can not but quote the remarks of Dr. Clarke on this subject ; and please to 
observe how 'recJtZess' he is in the selection of his quahfying words. 'Mansteal- 
crs — whether those who carry on the traffick in men's flesh and blood ; or those 
who steal a person in order to sell him into bondage ; or those who buy such stolen 
men or women, no matter of what color or country ; or those who sow dissension 
among barbarous tribes, in order that those taken in war may be sold into slavery : 
or the nation which legalizes or connives at such traffick ; — ail these ars men- 
Btealers.' And be classeB them with the most flagitious of raortale. 



So 

niarder combined. Therefore, the man who steals a negro from the 
coast of Guinea, is, in the eye of the American law, a pirate, or a 
manstealer and murderer. Now, if piracy he the crime which an- 
Bwers to robbery on land, what can v/e call those who carry on the 
internal slavetrade, but ' pirates ' and ' robbers ! ' Says a v/riter : 
♦ that the- stolen property can never become the lawful possession of the 
holder who claims it under a title derived from a thief, is a principle 
of law too well settled to admit of disputation.' The laws of all na- 
tions recognize the thief, and the receiver of stolen property, as iden- 
tified in the same guilt. The maxim, ' the receiver is as bad as th& 
thief,' is acknowledged t!ie woi-ld over. Ancesti*al transfer, or inher- 
itance, does not release the holder of stolen property from his share in 
the guilt. In the purchase of tiie negro, whether from the slave ves- 
sel just arrived from Guinea, or from the auction stand in the capital^ 
there is a trade — an act of buying and selling — an exchanging of 
men, women, and children, for money or barter — a speculation on 
God's image — a procuring of subsistence by selling human flesh, wheth- 
er it be per pound, or per head. This holds good from the fact, that the 
' article ' of the trade is stolen pi'operty. And it matters not through 
how many hands the ' property ' has passed — they are still and ever 
will be stolen human beings, deprived of personal liberty by violence 
and fraud ; and he in whose hands these stolen ' goods and chattels ' 
(pardon the terms) are found, is a thief. For this conclusion we are 
not left to the uncertainty of human reasoning, but we have a ' thus 
saith the Lord ' — « He that stealeih a man, or if he be found in his hands, 
he shall surely be put to death.' The punishment of both being the 
same, their crimes in the sight of infinite justice must be of the same 
turpitude. 

Again, those who buy and sell the childi'en of those who were sto- 
len from Africa, are menstealers. 

* All men arc ci'cated free and equal,' says the Declaration of Inde- 
pendence. (Some men are born slaves, says the chivalrous South.) 
Taking for granted, what every republican will at once admit, that 
all are born free — then all the descendants of those originally stolen 
from their nati^ land, arc of right free. Therefore, the man who 
claims the child of the stolen parent, as his slave, and reduces him to 
a ' chattel,' a 'thing,' a piece of property, is a land pirate and maa- 
stealer. This is a matter of course, for the same act, committed in 
Africa, the law would term pii-acy. Robbery is the same, whether 
committed on the high seas, or on the Mississippi river ; and man- 
stealing is the same, whether perpetrated on the coast of Guinea, of 



81 

the savannas of Georgia or the Carolinas. < It is wrong,' says Misa 
Grimke, 'to enslave an African, born under the most despotic laws, 
and in the deepest degradation ; and is it not wrong to enslave an 
American, around whom is throv/n the great shield of the Constitution 
and the Declaration of Independence ? ' ' It is a self-evident truth, 
that all men are created equal, and that they have certain inalienable 
rights ; among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.* 
David Ruggles, a man of color, speaking in reference to this point, 
says, ' tell me how many transfers must be made before the recipient 
becomes innocent, or freed from the original charge.' But slaveholders 
must not be called robbers and j}iratcs. Oh no — innocent men — 
gentlemen and ' Christians ; ' they inherited slaves ! What, inherited 
evils, of all of which the poor original kidnappers must give an ac- 
count ! Oh, if it be so — and if the sin of the son, or the evils of 
slavery, must go backward, and be visited upon the fatlier — and if 
there be a purgatory or hell, what concentrated wrath and fury must 
be the portion of ' original kidnappers ! ' 

These remarks are sufficient to prove that southern slaveholders ar» 
^menstealers,' &c., and that these epithets may be attached to them 
with perfect Christian propriety. Peter sharply reproved the hypoc 
risy and covetousness of Simon. Paul called Elymas the sorcerer, 
a ' child of the devil.' He also called the apostle Peter a dissimulator. 
The principle of holding men up in their true character, and calling 
them by their proper names, is fully illustrated by the example of 
Christ and the apostles. Jesus denounced the Scribes and Pharisees,' 
as 'children of the devil,' (John viii. 44,) 'hypocrites, who devoured 
-widows' houses,' — (suppose it had been, who devoured the slave's earn- 
ings)— 'Wind guides,' 'fools and blind.' These hard words, at the 
present day, would be called ' vituperations, harsh, censorious,' and 
« reckless' language ! But Paul not only calls slaveholders mensteal. 
ers, but classes them with the ' profane,' ' murderers of fathers,' ' mur. 
derers of mothers,' ' manslayers,' 'whoremongers,' 'liars and perjured 
persons,'— (what reckless words.) Yet they come from the pen d[ 
inspiration. Christ might have chosen softer words ; Paul might 
have selected not quite such harsh epithets. But the course of Christ 
and of Paul, was to rebuke sin and sinners by their proper names. 

Thus much for this point, and thus it is made plain how far behind 
the spirit of Christ and the apostles, are human-expediency, honey- 
mouthed apologists for American slavery. 

But Paul, it seems, addressed slaveholders in more becoming terms, 
ealling them * brethren in the Lord,' dec. This address was made to 



33 

Philemon, whom the gentleman has yet to prove was a slaveholder. 
In assuming the position which he has, the only force of his remarks 
is to screen the slaveholder from rebuke, and palliate his monstrous 
crimes by distorted scripture. 

The gentleman has acknowledged slavery to be an evil, and plainly 
declared his abhorrence of it. What then ? Is slavery wrong and 
nobody to blame ? Upon whom will he fasten the guilt ? Here is an 
hypothesis which metaphysics themselves can not unravel. Sin with- 
out a sinner ! But the declaration has another force, viz : if Paul 
would address the American slaveholder of the 19th century, as a 
brother in Christ, and ' beloved in the Lord,' it is evident that h© 
would either connive at sin, or else slaveholding is no sin. Says the 
apostle himself: 'For what fellowship hath righteousness with un- 
righteousness ; and what communion hath light with darkness? And 
what concord hath Christ with Belial ; or what part hath he that be- 
lieveth with an infidel ' [unbeliever] ? 2 Cor. vi, 14, 16. Hence, 
from the character of Paul, and the precepts which he has left record- 
ed, we infer that he would not connive at sin, or in any way shield 
the sinner from reproof : — therefore, slavery is right. Oh, Paul ! thou 
art fallen among robbers and clerical dignitaries — to traduce thee is 
fair. Paul calling men brethren, v/ho practise every species of crime 
of which they are capable — men who rob other men of themselves^ 
and <sink immortality into merchandize,' who rob them of their 
wives and children, who scourge arid lacerate, crush and destroy hu. 
manity, and daily perpetrate such high abominations as make angels 
weep and heaven blush, and which would, if God were not merciful 
and forbearing, hurl them quickly to the lowest hell ! Paul an associ- 
ate of thieves, robbers, murderers, adulterers, fornicators, and breakers 
of law ! How degrading to the great apostle ! What a gross libel 
upon the character of an evangelist of Jesus Christ! Is this reli- 
gion ? — that religion which is hve, which studies the peace and hap- 
piness of MAA^ the religion of the cross, of equal rights and privi. 
leges ! Reader, judge for yourself. 

Again, Paul said, ' Servants be obedient to your masters ; aboli- 
tionists say in effect to them, rebel.' 

I had supposed that the objection, that abolitionists preached the 
doctrine of insurrection, had long since been exploded ; but the gen- 
tleman has succeeded in resuscitating it, and wields the formidable 
objection with much confidence. It is evident to every one of com- 
mon intelhgence, that in contesting the doctrines of abolition, he has 
made in many instances, a light estimate of truth, and has not hesita- 



83 

ted to make assertions as wild as the ken of his 'own imagination. 
I have on a preceding page, in reply to nearly the same objection,, 
quoted an article from the Constitution of the New-York State Anti- 
Slavery Society, disclaiming in the most intelligible terms, any thing 
like physical force on the part of the slave, to obtain his freedom. 
A repetition is not necessary. The gentleman must attach a most 
significant and peculiar meaning to tlie phrase ' in effect,' or this as. 
sertion is a most unqualified falsehood, and unworthy a minister of 
Christ. Nor is the quotation with which he contrasted the cause of 
abolition, so forcible as may be supposed. The gentleman, with all 
his Grecian lore and classic acumen, did not assert that ' servants/ 
( (5ouXo(, in this passage,) should be ' slaves.'* 

Tlie passage can have its full and literal application, and I can not 
conceive how it can, in any manner, give any sanction to the right of 
the slaveholder over his victim. It is merely an exhortation to 
economics, and teaches the duties of servants to their employers, 
while with as great emphasis it demands, that they should render untc 
their < servants that which is just and equal.' 

In relation to the charge that the recklessness of abolitionists has 
driven from their ranks Rev. Edward N. Kirk, nothing definite can be 
.said. Mr. Kirk is now in Europe, where he has been for some time, 
else he could answer for himself, and the gentleman would have made 
his assertions with more caution. Mr. Kirk is still a member of the 
New-York State Anti-Slavery Society, and what "authority the gen- 
tleman has for saying that he has left ' their ranks,' I know not. 

The next sentence I will transpose thus : ' I can not fight under 
the abolition flag, when such men as Dr. Beecher, Herman Norton, 
Jacob Helffenstein, and Joel Parker, are directly opposed to the abo- 



* This exposition of this verse, many reject, and it does not agree with most of 
the commentaries. — But shall we receive error rather than truth, because it is taught 
by the wise and learned ? In relation to the word ctovXoi which many here presum- 
ed to mean slaves, I may here state what I intended to do elsewhere. The proper 
meaning of this word is, one who has been manumitted. The authority for thia 
translation is Chrysippus, a profound philosopher and grammarian, who lived about 
80 years before Christ. 

These are his words, ' AouXo? differs from oixsrrig. Those who have belft freed 
are still (JouXoi — but oixsroi are those not set free from being held as property. 
OtxSTrjc: is a slave held in possession.' If this is the proper meaning of oouXoff, 
modern apologists for the ' divine institution,' must prove that Paul departed from tho 
proper meaning of this word, and attached to it one that was improper. 

Again — in this passage xvawig is the word opposed to (5ouXoi» 'which,' enyn 
Donnegan, is used to denote ' one having authority over others — in reference to that 
over tlavat, osycroTTjj ig used.' 

5 



34 

litionists ; ' i. e., I consult human expediency in preference to divine 

revelation — I have not sufficient mora! courage to come out and breast 

the torrent of opposition which I should meet ; therefore, I will take 

covert under Dr. Beecher & Co. Very good indeed — (the bump 

of constructiveness must be well developed.) 

This is paying no enviable compliment to these Rev. Sirs. The 

gentleman has made them ' weather-cocks,' at which he ' seriously ' 

looks to know which way the ' wind is blowing ! ' Oh, bkst is 

' He who holds no parley with unmanly fears, 
Where duty bids, he confidently steers, 
Forces a thousand dangers at her call, 
And trusting in his God, surmounts them all.' 

Next comes a ho.it of charges, so entirely irrelevant, that I had 
almost concluded to pass them unnoticed. 

Wm. L. Garrison denies the Bible, &c. — Henry C. Wright has- 
some peculiar and ultra views in relation to government — Miss Grinike 
has asserted the rights of her sex. With all these opinions, abolition- 
ists, as such, have nothing to do ; they are private opinions, for which 
the individuals concerned are alone responsible ; they are not senti- 
ments admitted into the creed of abolitionists. Wm. L. Garrison, 
H. C. Wright, and Sarah M. Grimke, are zealous advocates of tem- 
perance. Do their opinions therefore belong to the Temperance So- 
ciety ? — or should that society be denounced on account of them ? — 
This is indeed lugging logic by the ears. 

It is no more than justice, to state in this connection, that Mr. 
Garrison does not ' deny the Bible, do away with the Sabbath,' or 
' curse the clergy.' The principles of Mr. Wright are what are 
called Ultra peace principles, the same which here excited so much in- 
terest among all classes. Miss Grimke believes that woman is equal 
with 7nan ;— surely this is not very heretical, and the gentleman has 
not much to fear by admitting it to be tnce. 

SIXTH OBJECTIOX. 

I am opposed to the course of modern abolitionists, because it is 
opposed to the course pursued on the same subject by the apostles. — 
The course of modern abolitionists is inconsistent with the conduct of 
the primitive church in relation to the subject of slavery ; and here 
particularly, I want the mind of the congregation to dwell. 

The apostles unquestionably viewed slavery as an evil. It existed 
in full rigor in their day among the Jews, Greeks, and Romans. — 
Among the Greeks and Romans, tiie master had power by law over 
the Jife of the slave, and it not only permitted him to inflict all the ill 



35~ 

usage he pleased, but to take with impunity his very existence. — 
Slavery thus existed in its most cruel and despotic forms, during the 
labors of the apostles. What course did they take in reference to it ? 
Happy for the church, we have their conduct on record. 

The first passage to which I refer, is found in 1 Cor. vii. 21. 'Art 
thou called being a servant ; care not for it, but if thou mayest be 
free, use it rather.' The apostle here, undoubtedly, addressed slaves. 
This is clear, first, from the meaning of the word in the original from 
■which the word servant is translated. The Greek word is oovXog, 
and means slave. Secondly, the apostle speaks of their slaves in a 
state of grace, as bought with a price. The use of the term free 
implies that they zcere slaves. Free from v.'hat ? Free from appren- 
ticeship ? No ! From common service ? No ! — this was their call- 
ing. But free from the servitude of slavery. This was undoubtedly 
Paul's meaning. In this exposition, I am sustained by Henry, Clarke, 
Scott, and Burkitt. It is plain then to see how Paul treated the sub- 
ject of slavery. ' Art thou called being a servant 1 ' — art thou converted 
being a slave ? care not for it ; that is, for the circumstances of 
thy slavery, do not fret and worry — do not insist on thy freedom — but 
if thou mayest be free, use it rather. If thou canst get thy freedom, 
get it, prefer it — thou oughtest to be a freeman ; and if friends can 
purchase thee, or if thy master will give thee free, use it by all means. 
But how different this advice fro n that of the abolitionists ! They 
tell the slave to run away, and he is assisted in every attempt to do 
so. The abolitionists of New York, I am credibly inlbrmed, have ap- 
pointed a committee of vigilance, to receive and help on all runaway 
slaves. Now compare this course with that of Paul. 'Art thou 
called being a slave ? care not for it ; but if thou mayest be free, use 
it rather.' Is there any attempt there to create disaffection between 
the master and servant? — to create insubordination and misrule 1 

The second quotation is from 1 Tim. vi.i,2. ' Let as many servants 
as are under the yoke, count their ov.n masters worthy of all honor, 
lliat the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. And they 
that have believing masters, let them not despise thejn, because they 
are brethren ; but rather do than service, because they are faithful 
ar»d beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and ex- 
hort.' How strikingly did Paul, (in the subsequent verses,) centuries 
ago, portray the very spirit of modern abolitionism, as it exists among 
«s — •' whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, p^verse 
disputings of men of corrupt m.inds, supposing that gain is godliness.' 
* * * Now who does r.o* porceivo that Paul and his advice here, 



86 

it in direct variance with modern abolitionists T Hero the slave is 
commanded to treat his master ' with all honor and respect ' — not to 
rebel against him, or run away from him. Paul unquestionably did 
not consider that civil rights v/ere abolished by religion, but that the 
slave converted, as such, was still chiefly to sustain the same relations 
to his master, unless by a mutual arrangement between him and his 
master, he could obtain his liberty. 

The last quotation is Paul's epistle to Philemon, a noted slaveholder.. 
The cause of Paul's writing this letter was as follows : Onesimus, a 
slave, had from some pretence or other, run away from his master^ 
and come to Rome, where the apostle was then a prisoner and preach- 
er. Onesimus came under the influence of truth, and was converted. 
On this occurrence Paul sends him back to Philemon with a letter^ 
from which we make the following extract : ' Paul, a prisoner of Je- 
sus Christ, and Timothy our brother, unto Philemon our dearly be- 
loved and fellow laborer,' 'I thank my God, making mention of thee 
always in my prayers,' (with a very diflferent spirit, I fear, from that 
of modern abolitionists,*) ' hearing of thy love and faith, which thou 
bast towards the Lord Jesus, and toward all saints ; that the commu- 
nication of thy faith may become effectual by the acknowledging of 
every good thing which is in you in Christ Jesus. For we have great 
joy and consolation in thy love, because the bowels of the saints are 
refreshed by thee, brother. Wherefore, though I might be much bold 
in Christ to enjoin thee that which is convenient, yet for love's sako 
I rather beseech thee ' (that is the spirit) * for my son Onesimus, 
whom I hav€ begotten in my bonds : which in time past was to thee- 
unprofitable, but now profitable to thee and to me : whom I have sent 
ag^in : ' — (do abolitionists ever send slaves back to their masters ? ) — 
' thou therefore receive him, that is, mine own bowels ; whom I would 
have retained with me, that in thy stead he might have ministered 
unto me in the bonds of the gospel : but without thy mind would I do 
nothing ; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but 
willingly. For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou 
shouldest receive him forever ; not now as a servant, but above a ser- 
vant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto 
thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord. If thou count me therefore 



• This is a most extraordinary allusion, and is tlie betraying of a restlew 
conscience. Certain members of hig church, lamenting the position which he occu- 
pied in relation to human rights, often remembered their pastor in their prayers. — 
Thia he could not endure, and he construod it into au ' insult,' and caused by * 
wrong spirit. 



37 

•a partner, receive hirn as myself. If he hath wronged thee, or oweth 
thee aught, put that to mine account ; I Paul have written it with mine 
•own hand,' — [I have given you here a note of hand. If Onesimus has 
•injured you do not put it down to his account — do not owe him a 
grudge ; — here I give you a note of hand for all expenses he may have 
incurred,] — ' I will repay it : albeit I do not say to thee how thou ow- 
-est unto me thine own self besides.' [Albeit I do not say unto thee, 
Mjwn thyself abased — you are one of my spiritual children in the gos. 
pel ; put down all that you have against Onesimus, against me.] — 

* Yea, brother, let me have joy of thee in the Lord : refresh my bowels 
in the Lord. Having confidence in thy obedience I wrote unto thee, 
knowing that thou wilt also do more than I say.' 

We are led, in reading these paragraphs, to a contrast of the spirit 
of the two, [Paul and the abolitionists] — the one heavenly and mild, 
and the other rancorous and full of hate. ' He therefore departed for 
a season,' &c. — Dr. Clarke makes the following judicious remark : 

* This is a most delicate subject — he departed an unprofitable slave for 
a short time, but so is the mercy of God, he now returns, not an un- 
profitable slave, but a beloved brother in the Lord, to be in the same 
heavenly family with thee forever. Do not receive him merely as thy 
slave, nor treat him according to that condition, but as a brother and 
a genuine Christian, particularly dear tome.' By pious masters thus 
slavery is virtually destroyed. 



The last objection which the gentleman produces, certainly caps the 
climax, and is the master-stroke of absurdity. The great Paul is 
made a giant sinner, conniving at American slavery. Is the gentle- 
man opposed to slavery ? Why all this labor to prove that Paul did 
not rebuke this enormous sin ? Is this course calculated to arouse the 
slaveholder to a sense of his crime in converting men into chattels ? — 
or to allay the storm of his conscience and quiet his guilty fears ? 
I ask the gentleman himself, when would the pei-iod arrive for the ab- 
olition of slavery, if no one was more opposed to it than himself? 
By what species of arithmetic would he calculate the time as it rolled 
away ? ' Opposed to slavery,' forsooth ! So are slaveholders as 
much ; and the pillars of the earth would rot aivay, and nature tumble 
into chaos, ere the first shackle would burst under the hammer of 
of emancipation. Slavery would be transferred to the latest genera, 
tion, and etill they would forge hand-cufis, manacles, thumb-screws, 



38 

padlocks, and ircns ; siiil would American slaves be yoked, clmined, 
kidnapped, tortured, and lashed — and no ray of hope would pierce 
their dark prison-house. Opposed to slavery ! — aye, with a ven- 
geance ! So are all, and a cer.tury and a half has passed away, and 
no eflectual efforts have been made to remove the evil — but on the 
other hand, it has increased with the silent growth of the forest oak, 
huge and monstrous ; and some have come to the deliberate conclusion^ 
that slavery is a divine institution. A.nd Paul himself, according to^ 
the Rev. Sir, did not consider it an evil of much consequence. 

In replying to this objection, the attention is particularly desired.. 
The gentleman considers it one of the highest importance, and cer- 
tainly its refutation can be no less important. True, slavery existed 
in Greece and Rome when the apostle wrote ; but Greek and Roman 
slavery are not the counterparts of that which disgraces this republic. 

Roman slaves vvcre generally those who were captured and consid- 
ered prisoners of war. Criminals also, were sometimes condemned to 
perpetual servitude as a punishment. Hence we often hear of galley 
slaves, or those condemned to the drudgery of the galley, either for a 
longer or shorter period, according to the magnitude of their crimes. 
' But,' says a writer, ^free-horn citizens Avere not allowed, in ordinary 
rases, to sell themselves or oi\\ev free -horn -persons, into this condition. 
Here then we have a leading feature of Roman slavery — slaves were 
either those who were once free-horn and had forfeited their liberty 
by crime, or those taken in battle. How is it with American slave- 
ry 1 Without any forfeiture of his rights on the part of the victim, 
and without any pretext for the seizing of his person, except sheer 
avarice, the free-born American citizen, is arrested and dragged into 
slavery. And his sons and daughters, by virtue of no other title than 
that derived from a thief or ■pirate, are doomed to drink the ' bitter 
draught ' and drench their lips with ' toil-drops ' and blood. Roman 
slaves had a certain Loniim allowed them daily. From this source, 
they often accumulated money enough to purchase themselves in a 
few years. How is it with American slaves? Says the slave code of 
the chivalrous South, ' he [the slave] can do nothing, possess nothing, 
nor acquire any thing hut what must helong to his master.'* In ordi- 
nary cases, hardly a lithe is allowed the poor down-trodden man of 
the South, from all the earnings of his toil, to cheer his disconsolate 
bosom — not a single star of hope j-inned on that dark curtain of 



Civil codg of I/nui.-jiana. Ar;. S.*). 



39 

slavery which hems him in on every t.ido, and aliiita out tiic liglit of 
heaven, to cause hinj 



To feel 



The weight of human misery less, and ghde 
Ungroaning to the tomb.' 

Roman slavery was rarely so rutliless as to break asunder the ties 
of woman's love, and wrench from the arms of a parent all his earthly 
hopes. It did not send the hapless father to northern Gaul, and the 
frantic mother to southern Greece, while their children were kept to 
grace the halls of a Cicero or a Caesar at the capital. No ; this was 
a stretch of cruelty which heathen Rome would not countenance. 
But, reader, how is it with christian America ? Go, peep into this 
modern Bastile — not into its dungeons, nor its grated cells — but listen 
to the heart-breaking cries of the wife, and see the husband wringing 
his hands in wild despair — his bosom heaves not with vengeance, but 
his heart is sv/oUen, and the ' wheels of life ' drag heavily. He is 
soon forced away — where? He is shipped for New Orleans, and 
thence is driven to the wilds and swamps of Florida, separated from 
his wife and family forever. Go, stand by the Mississippi, and see 
the purchased corgo of men float along. What a horrid picture to 
the eye ! — a boat-load of blighted hopes, broken ties, fatherless sons 
and motherless daughters, forlorn wives and wretched husbands — the 
domestic circle disjointed, and its several limbs scattered as far as the 
demon's arm can hurl them. All these are leading characteristics of 
American slavery — perpetrated daily to a fearful extent. 

Greek slavery was similar to the Roman, and although in some pla- 
ces of Greece the slaves were treated with great cruelty, yet in many 
particulars it would hardly bear a comparison with that which this 
nation tolerates — (perhaps with the exception of Sparta.) At Athens, 
when the slave was cruelly treated by his master, he could flee to the 
temple of Theseus out of the reach of the oppressor. They could 
hold property, and could purchase their liberty — their masters nolens 
volens. ' They were also allowed to institute suits at law against their 
masters, for undue severity in the infliction of punishment, and for 
attempts on their chastity. But how is it with the American slave ? 
Is not his condition absolutely and hopelessly settled ? Is there any 
temple within whose sacred enclosures there is safety for him ? Is 
there any law to which the abused man and insulted woman can ap- 
peal for justice ? Alas ! there is none ! They have prison-houses 
and dungeons, where the fugitive is bolted in. The arm of the oppress 
or reaches from Maine to Florida ; in no part of the confederacy, 



40 

is his hunted victim safe* The law connives at the exercise of cruelty 
upon the slave, and shields the slaveholder from retribution. Females 
also, are subject to the will of licentious and irresponsible masters. 
The results of such pov;er may readily be supposed — the southern- 
states are filled with the fruits of amalgamation. More than 16,000 
human beings wearing the complexion of the mulatto, are scattered 
within their boundaries-^all of them slaves. The reference to Hebrew 
slavery in the time of the apostles, is hardly worthy of notice. I im- 
agine that the gentleman v/ould find much difficulty in proving that 
it existed at all. At that time the Hebrews were subject to the Ro- 
mans ; and many of them were taken as slaves and exported into Si- 
cily, Rome, and Sardinia. Thus the analogy of Greek and Roman,, 
to American slavery, is Hot strict in regard to many of its most 
important features.* 

The first quotation adduced by the gentleman is found in 1 Cor- 
vii. 21, 'Art thou called being a servant? care not for it; but if thou 
mayest be free, use it rather : ' — to which I add the 23d verse,- ' Ye 
'are bought with a price ; be not ye the servants of men.' 

The following remarks on this passage, are taken from the ' Testi- 
mony of God against Slavery,' pp. 115 : 

' In his letter to the Corinthian church, the apostle Paul addressed 
himself freely to servants. Would the abettors and supporters of 
American slavery allow him such a privilege ? 

2. He teaches them to rise if possible to a state of freedom. — 
Would the abettors and supporters of American slavery permit him 
to impress such a lesson on their slaves ? Would they not rather 
brand him as a fanatic ; reproach him as an incendiary ; inflict upon 
him the penalty of Lynch law ? 

3. He teaches them to regard themselves as entitled to the benefits 
of freemen — and freemen of the most dignified and exalted character. 
Would the abettor and supporter of American slavery allow his slave 
to listen to such language ? No fears would he have, that they might 
fall out with their chains, put on airs, and get above their proper pla- 
ces? 

4. He charges them, by all the regard they had for their Redeemer, 
' to refuse to be the servants of men.' Strong and startling language ! 
Would the abettor and supporter of American slavery permit such an 
exhortation to fall upon the open ears of his slave ? Would he not re- 
gard it as subversive of the system by which they are held in bonds ? 

As they value the blood which was shed for their redemption, they 
may not be 'the servants of men !' And this language every servant 



* I do not draw the comparison between Greek and Roman slavery, and Ameri- 
can slavery, in any way to smooth over the thing ; but that the reader may see all 
the horrors of Southern oppression. 



41 

hiust interpret for himself! Might he not regard it as a warrant 
to cast away his fetters ? Will the abettor and supporter of Amer- 
'ican slavery permit his vassals to try their skill at exposition on this 
passage? If not, perhaps he would consent to hear father Flatf, a, 
German commentator of excellent spirit and high reputation, explain 
it. I have ventured to translate a paragraph, in which he offers his 
views bf its meaning. ' Be not such servants of men, that ye can not 
at the same time be the freemen of the Lord. Be not the slaves of men, 
who would force upon you wrong opinions: 1 Cor. i, 12; Col. ii, 8, 
who would use you as the means of gratifying their passions, or of 
accomplishing their selfish objects : 2 Cor. ii, 20. Do nothing which 
is contrary to your dignity or to obedience to God, from sinful compli- 
ance to others or from fear.' ******* 

It is very certain that the apostle requires his servants to prefer 
death to obedience to such injunctions as might hinder their progress 
in the christian life. Whatever might contribute to enlighten their 
minds and quicken their consciences and increase their usefulness, 
they were eager to lay hold of— and this, at whatever expense. Tiie 
master, who would cripple, or embarrass, or discourage them in so do: 
ing, thev must resist, and resist at the hazard of their lives. This 
clearly is the doctrine whicli the apostle Paul requires them to receive. 

Southern tyrants have their reasons for v.ithholding tiieir Bible from 
the slave. It is most manifestly and irreconcilably against the op- 
pression they practise. They would burn it over a slow fire sooner 
than put it into the hands ol' their bondmen. Their impudence is 
only equalled by their iiypocrisy, in blasphemously pretending that 
such a book is friendly to oppression. With this pretence upon their 
iips, they make laws to prevent their slaves from reading it ! What 
do they fear? That it will make these wretched men too well pleas. 
ed with their condition ? No. They know that it would light up in 
their bosoms such a llame as the waters of the Mississippi could not 
quench.' 

Another writer, in speaking of these passages, gives the following 
exposition : 

« His [Paul's] instructions on this occasion, embrace the following 
injunctions upon servants :— (1) That they should endure their ser- 
vile condition with patience, and not disquiet themselves v/ith smful 
repinings, or unavailing solicitude and regret on that account— vers© 
21. (2) But still if it was possible for them to be free, aXX' £i xai 
(Juvatfai, they were required to secure their freedom, and not voluntarily 
to continue in the servitude then existing and prevalent — verse 21. 
(3) ' Ye are bought with a price ; he ye not the servants of men,' (verse 
23,) evidently prohibits the exercise of a servile spirit, and an undue 
voluntary subjection to the authority of man in any relation, particu- 
larly that of MASTER or SLAVEHOLDER ; on the ground that we are 
the servants of Christ, and that a due discharge of the duties we owo 
bira, is incompatible with servile subjection to human authority.' 

fiays a London divine on this passage — (' Ye are bought with « 

6 



43 

price,' &c.) — ♦ seek by every Imcful means not to be in bondage to 
any man.^ Admitting then that the class referred to in these pas- 
sages were slaves, we have a fair, reasonable, and righteous exposition 
before us. 

Taking general principles, which are in the light of scripture self, 
evident, as our premises, we can come to no other concluoion, than 
that the apostles are opposed, opposed most emphatically, to any thing 
like slavery. In the passages referred to, Paul's injunctions are not at 
all directed to the master — he makes no regulation in regard to his 
pretended right ; but directs them wholly as a balm of consolation to 
the wretched beings held in servitude. He tells them to be patient in 
suffering wrong, and then, in the true dignity and honesty of an am- 
bassador for Jesus Christ, declares him to be a man, and fully entitled 
to the rights of a man, and a freeman. The gentleman inquires, very 
quaintly indeed ! ' v/hether there is any attempt to create disaffection,' 
&c., and then exclaims, ' how different this course from that of mod- 
ei-n abolitionists ! ' His ideas of abolition appear to be all gathered 
from hear-say, and he sets down all its measures as attempts to create 
insubordination among the slaves of the South — how ? — by declaring 
that they are men and God's freemen. This is the spirit of aboli- 
tion, and startling as it is to the buyers of hyman flesh, it is the thun- 
dering voice of Jehovah, proclaiming throughout his universe, 'Ye 
are bou"-ht with a price ; be ye not the servants of men.' Paul has 
uttered the fearful words, and ' whether it creates insubordination, 
misrule, and disaffection,' or not, the slaves at the South should at this 
moment he free. And were the aged apostle now among the living, 
the sermon of Rev. B. F. Wile, v.ould brand him as a ' peace-disturber 
and preacher of rebellion.' Here abolitionists have circulated pub- 
lications throughout the country containing such an incendiary sen- 
tence as this. Then the thousands upon thousands now in slavery, 
and connected v.ith christian churches, and whom the gentleman be- 
lieves ' are now on their way to heaven,' are committing sin, in re- 
maining in their servile condition, if they can by any means escape it. 
Rev. Sir, is not this the doctrine of insubordination ? ' Ye are bought 
with a price ' — this price was undoubtedly the blood of Christ ; and 
since, as Christ says, no man can serve two masters, a slave can not 
obey a man who sets himself up in the place of God. Duty to God 
is incompatible with the servile submission of American slavery. 

•Art thou called being a slave ; care cot for it.' Why? — because 
•lavcry is a divine institution? — because it is right? No; — ' th« 



48 

time is short,' and * the fashion of this world passeth away,* and then 
the scenes of eternity will present a different aspect to the mind. 

' The spirit can not always sleep in dust.' 

But, O how opposite is the course of abolitionists ! They assist 
meti in escaping from slavery ; they have a committee of vigilance 
to protect the victim of pro-slavery thievishness ! The first sugges- 
tion of the mind, on reading such sentences, is, is the author sane 7 
For myself, in this instance I would not vouch for it. Were this a 
voice from the days of the crusades, when they burned men at the 
stake accused of less heretical notions, one would not wonder so 
much ! Even then the Pope would hardly grant absolution for such 
rank heresy ! But when it comes from the pulpit in the 19th cen- 
tury, an honest man can hardly restrain his indignation. Opposed to 
slavery, and yet the author of such laborious and slavish sentiments ! — 
such ridiculous and crude inferences ! — such irreligion and down- 
right blasphemy ! Oh, ' tell it not in Gath, publish it not in the 
streets of Askelon.' Wrong, to take in the unfortunate man just es- 
caped from the fangs of the monster, and if he is hungry feed him, 
and if he is thirsty give him drink? Wrong, to relieve the wretch- 
edness and supply the wants of the 'poorest of the poor?' Wrong, 
to hide from the eyes of his oppressor the trembling victim ? Then 
indeed is it wrong to assist the fugitive slave. Every candid mind 
must acknowledge that the slave has as much right to escape from hia 
master, as the master has to steal and appropriate him to his own use ; 
and that while Paul urged the slaves to be patient, he at the same time, 
in commanding them not to be the slaves of men, permitted them to 
use all reasonable means in making their escape. But what says the 
word of God on this subject ? ' These are the statutes and judgments 
which ye shall observe to do in the land which the Lord God of thy 
fathers giveth thee to possess it, all the days that ye live upon the 
earth.' Deut. xii. 1. This is one of tliem : 'Thou shalt not deliver 
unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto 
thee.' Whom shall abolitionists obey — God or man ? 

The second quotation adduced by the gentleman, is found in 1 Tim. 
vi. 1, 2. * Let as many servants as are under the yoke, count their 
own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doc* 
trine be not blasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let, 
them not despise them because they are brethren ; but rather do tbcp* 



44 

aerrice, because they are faithfal and beloTsd, partaken of the b«a- 
ofit.'* 

Let us hear the explanation of Pres. Green : 

•Perhaps no passage in the New Testament is so much insisted on 
in support of their views, by the apologists for slavery, as the follow, 
ing : ♦ Let as many servants as are under the yoke, count their own 
masters worthy of all honor, that the namio of God and his doctrine be 
not blasphemed. And they that have believing masters, let them not 
despise them because thoy are brethren ; but rather do them service, 
because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. 1 
Tim. vi. 1, 2. Prof. Stuart refers to this passage, to show that 'the 
relation of master and slave is not as a mattsr of course abrogated 
between all Christians.' With my exposition of this passage, Her. 
meneutics is greatly dissatisfied. It is clear — 

1. That the apostle here addresses himsQh'lo two classes of servants. 
How does he distinguish the one from the other ? The one compre- 
hended ' whatever servants were under the yoke ; '—-all who were 
properly slaves. To avoid blasphemy, these were to count their raas» 
ters worthy of all the respect which they were able to exact of their 
vassals. This general direction the apostle quahfies and limits in his 
letter to the Corinthians. They were to render no service and yield 
no respect which might be inconsistent with the claims of their Sa- 
vior. * Be not ye the servants of men,' — ' Ye are boiight with a 
price.' The other class included such servants as had 'believing mas. 
ters.' What relation did they sustain to each other ? — of goods and 
chattels to absolute owners ? — of things to irresponsible despots ? — 
Surely not. The relation ' of beethren.' How much this involved, 
the letter to Philemon clearly explains. Enough to oblige the master 
to regard his christian servants, as he would the apostle Paul, ' both 
in the flesh and in the Lord ' — in every thing in which one man could, 
03 a man, be related to another. If Hermeneutics had not stuck so 
tenaciously ♦ to the bark,' he must have seen that here was emancipa- 
tion in its noblest sense. 

2. All who are acquainted with the history of emancipation know, 
that on being set free, slaves very generally ' go to work ' for their 
former masters. Look at the slaves, who by French influence wero 
jnanumltted in St. Domingo. Look at the slaves from whom tho 
yoke was recently removed in Antigua. The master naturally need* 
their services, and to secare them offers wages instead of stripes. 
To whom would the christian servants the apostle addresses, look for 
employment, sooner than to such masters as had devoted themselves to 
the same Savior in whom themselves confided ? 

• The gentleman read many of the subsequent verses, insinuating that Paul xna 
describing the heresies of abolitionists, constantly pruning and making explanatorj 
remarks, of which the following is a specimen : ' And they that have believing 
maBters,' — (that right ! What ! Paul love a slaveholder as a brother in Josuji 
Christ ?) — • because they are partakers of the benefit.' — (What ! a slaveholder hav» 
rtligion I Paul here declares that they are partakers of die benefit, that is, of tho 
atonement, of the mercy of God in Christ.) ' These things teach and exhort If 
any loan fmsrk) teach otherwise,' — (There are some who do teach ptherwiso, and I 
sUclara it oafore God,) &c. &«. What relitfiou* tiiciwry ! 



43 

%. i^ofiilng would be moro natural, than (o continue the eorrelativ* 
names, specially where there was no danger of misapprehension, 
which they had mutually borne. The term ' servant ' was generical, 
describing any one, who on any conditions, however advantageous 
and honorable, rendered service to another. How often, moreover, 
do we not speak of Toissaint, as sending supplies to his old Unaster* 
in America ? Nothing whatever can be tairly inferred in favor of the 
continuance of slavery in the church, from the use of such words as 
•master and servant,' in the connections in which Paul employs them. 

4. To these views, the exhortation of the apostle is admirably ad- 
apted. He exhorts, not to 'despise their masters because they ai'O 
brethren.' Here my Hermeneutical censor charges me with ' taking 
a word instead of a thing.' This might for aught I know, be a grave 
charge, if it could be made intelligibble. I know of no other v^'ay in 
which an interpreter can lay hold of the things he has to dispose of, 
than through the %oords he 'is set ' to explain. The apostle exhorted 
the servants whom he addressed, who, in distinction from those who 
were 'under the yoke,' had 'believing masters,' not to despise them. 
How superficial I must iiave been, to give to the word despise the only 
meaning which general usage justifies — especially when used in a 
connection which demanded that signification ! Hermeneutics is 
forced to admit, that 'm one respect masters and slaves had come on a 
level — they xoere brethren.^ They were on a level then on the whole 
ground to which Christianity extends its obligations. Wherever the 
golden rule was applicable — wherever obedience to the command, 
* thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,' was required — there they 
stood, according to Hermeneutics, side by side on the ground of equal, 
ity. I demand then — in the name of common sense and christian 
truth, I demand, whether on this ground, one brother could hold another 
as a piece of property, in subserviency to his own will — withholding 
from him what the God of Nature and the Author of Revelation had 
self-evidently and inalienably bestowed upon him ? One christian 
brother owning another ! Besides, in the letter to Philemon, the apos- 
tle explains the meaning of the word ' brother.' He is careful there 
to say, that it covers all the ties which as ' flesh ' bind one man to 
another. With what rightfulauthority does not Hermeneutics rebuke 
me for my stick-to-the-letter-shallowness ! On the ground that the 
servants of ' believing masters ' were raised to an equality with them, 
nothing could be more appropriate than the exhortation of the apostle. 
Ba not intoxicated, I hear liim say, with your new-born freedom. 
Raised to equality with your masters, now your equitable and affec- 
tionate employers, beware of assuming airs of importance. Be not 
arrogant. Do not despise those whom you ought to love and respect.' 

Rev. James H. Dickey, says, [' Testimony of God against Slave- 
ry,' pp. 134] :— 

'But, it will be said, the apostle calls them believing 5£c'iro<r*;ff, 
and therefore we must infer that a man might be a believer 
and still remain a ^srfiroTiij, or slaveholder. But it does not follow. — 
The term h(i*ary\^, therefore, is proper to describe the person and th« 
formor relation. If we should B«y such a man "was a reforraod drunk- 



46 

ard, we should not intend to be understood that he is a drunkard sti]|» 
but only describe his former condition. If the speaker should say 
that as an abolitionist, he is a converted slaveholder, it would be a 
case exactly parallel. 

It is said that the word rendered servant means slave ; but it is not 
so ; the word is OouXog, and it means servant. It is true, all slaves 
are servants, but all servants are not slaves. The apostle in the sixth 
chapter of Timothy, wlicn ho wishes to address christian servants 
who were slaves, adds the description 'under the yoke.' ' 

* Ye that have believing masters — let them not despise them because 
they are faithful and beloved, (oi Tr}c: £vspys(fiff.; avr(Xa|x,'3avo,asvoj,) parti- 
cipators in well doing.' 'Persons under the yoke of servitude to be- 
lieving masters, were required not to despise them because they were 
Christians, and in that respect only their equals and brethren ; but to 
do them service as Christians and friends, and as persons participating 
with themselves in the exercise of true benevolence and justice, and 
who consequently might be expected to treat them with kindness, and 
equitably to compensate them for whatever service they performed.' 
Christians may have retained persons as servants, without retaining 
them as slaves. The yoke of servitude which they imposed, may 
have been very different from that of the heathen. The fact of its 
being called by the same name, does not prove it to be the same thing. 
These instructions do not necessarily imply that the primitive chris- 
tians held their ' servants ' as ' slaves,' but on a contrary supposition 
they are perfectly appropriate. 

Had the servants referred to been hired servants or apprentices, the 
apostolic injunction would still be proper and forcible. The supposi- 
tion that they were such, harmonizes with the spirit of Christianity ; 
it is therefore to be preferred. These things can not but carry con- 
viction to every heart, and light to every mind. As an argument, it 
proves conclusively, that oppression has no hiding place in the wri- 
tings of Paul. We have hore the opinions of acknowledged scholars, 
that the terms used will apply in the one case as well as in the other. 
Where then, is there any necessity which forces upon a man the 
conclusion that they were slaves, held in absolute possession ? What 
necessity is there for a minister to come to such a conclusion ? Does 
it add to religion ? Does it give weight, character, and importance 
to the Bible ? Surely not — yet the gentleman is opposed to slavery ! 
What other force can we give to the gentleman's language, than that 
of palliating crime, as acknowledged in slaveholding ? Shame on 
such Pharisaical disposition of scripture ! 

♦ He [Paul] commanded the slave to treat bis master with all honor 



47 

and respect, but did he eay that the master's claim was righteous ? 

* The slave converted, as such, was still chiefly to sustain the same re- 
lations to his master ; unless, by a mutual arrangement between him 
and his master, he could obtain his liberty.' Indeed ! new measures 
again ! — ' mutual arrangement !' Does not the gentleman know that 
there is no such thing as mutuality between master and slave ? If 
slavery is right, freedom must be a gift, on the part of the master — if 
wrong, then what nonsense, to talk of a mutual arrangement ! If it 
is a gift, then the slave had no right or claim to his freedom, hence 
slaveholding is no sin. This is not the doctrine of Paul ; and the 
gentleman comes under the portraiture drawn by his own hand, 
' whereof cometh envy, strife,' <Sic. — ' supposing that gain is godli- 
ness.' 

The third and last quotation is the epistle of Paul to Philemon, 
whom the gentleman has so far disgraced as to call him a slaveholder. 

* Onesimus,' says a certain writer, ' appears from the high character 
given of him in this epistle, and in Col. iv, 9, to have been a man of 
uncommon excellence and moral worth, and probably of high intel- 
lectual attainments. The interpretation of the epistle relating to him, 
which -consigns to perpetual servitude so distinguished a servant of 
Christ, is manifestly partial and erroneous.' This is an honest and 
reasonable inference, and throws much light on the subject. 

But hear Pres. Green : 

^ Paul sent back Onesimus to Philemon. By what process was this 
done ? Did the apostle, a prisoner at Rome, seize upon the poor fu- 
gitive, and drag him before some heartless and perfidious Recorder, 
then, to obtain legal authority to send him back to Collosse ? Did he 
bring his helpless victim away from the fat and supple magistrate, to 
be driven under the pressure of chains and with the inflictions of the 
lash, to the field of unrequited toil, whence he had escaped ? Far 
otherwise. Had the apostle been like some religious teachers in the 
American churches, he might, as a Professor of Sacred Literature in 
one of our seminaries, or a preacher of the gospel to the rich in some 
of our cities, have consented thus to promote the peculiar interests of 
a. dear «laveholding brother. But the venerable champion of truth 
and fi^eedom was himself under bonds in the imperial city — waiting 
for the crown of martyrdom. He wrote a letter to the church at 
•Colosse, which was accustomed to meet at the house of Philemon, 
and another letter to that magnanimous disciple, and sent them by the 
hand of Onesimus. So much for the way in which Onesimus was 
sent back to his master. 

A slave escapes from a patriarch in Georgia, and seeks a refuge irr 
a parish of the Connecticut doctor, who once gave public notice, that 
h« saw no reason for caring for the servitude of his fellow men. Un- 



46 

«3er the influcncft 6i thfe doctor, Csesar becomes a christian convert* 
Burning with love for the son whom he hath begotten in the gospel, 
our doctor resolves to send him back to his master. Accordingly, he 
writes a letter, gives it to Cjesar, and bids him return, staff in hand, 
to the ' corner-stone of our republican institutions.' Now, what would 
any Cassar do, who had ever had a link of slavery's chain upon him 7 
As he left the presence of his spiritual father, should we be surprised 
to hear him say, in communion with himself : ' What ! return of my 
own accord to the man, who with the hand of a thief plucked me from 
the bosom of my mother ! — for whom I have been often drenched with 
the sweat of unrequited toil ! — whose violence so often cut my flesh and 
scarred my limbs ! — who shut out every ray of light from the darkness 
in which he had confined me ! — who with blasphemous tongue laid 
claim to those honors which my Creator and Redeemer demand at my 
hand ! And for what am I to return ? To be cursed and smitten, 
and sold to some trafficker in human flesh ! To be tempted, and torn, 
and destroyed ! I can not thus throw myself away — thus rashly 
rush upon my own destruction.' 

Have you ever heard of the voluntary return of a fugitive from 
American oppression, to the fetters and scourges from which he had 
escaped? Do you think that Dr. Hewitt and his friends, with all 
their magnanimous and tender-hearted dont-care-ism, could persuade 
one to take a letter in his hand, and carry it to the patriarch from 
whose service he had fled? Credulity must be stretched on the rack 
to believe this of Onesimus. ' Paul sent back Onesimus to Philemon.* 
For what purpose ? In some pecuniaiy transaction between them, 
Onesimus seems to have been guilty of injuring Philemon. ' If,' writes 
the apostle, ' he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee aught, put that on 
my account.' Alive to the claims of duty, the penitent fugitive would 
' restore ' whatever he ' had taken away.' He would honestly pay his 
debts. This resolution, the apostle warmly approved. He was ready, 
at whatever expense, to help his young disciple in carrying it into full 
effect. Of this, he assured Philemon in language the most explicit 
and emphatic. Here we find one reason for the conduct of Paul in 
sending Onesimus to Philemon. 

If a fugitive slave of the Rev. Mr. Smilie^of Mississippi, should re- 
turn to him with a letter from a doctor of divinity in New York, con- 
taining such an assurance, hov/ v/ould the reverend slaveholder dis- 
pose of it ? I hear him exclaim : ' What have we here 1 What can 
the doctor mean? ' ' If Cudjoe has not been upright in his pecuniary 
intercourse with you — if he owes you any thing, put that on my ac- 
count. Take my name as security for any debt v.hich he may hav© 
failed to pay.' What ignorance of the peculiarities of southern in- 
stitutions, do not our northern friends continually betray ! If their 
ears were not too delicate to hear him, the humblest lecturer among 
the abolitionists, could teach them, that it is mockery to talk of pe- 
cuniary intercourse between a slave and his master. The slave him' 
telf, with all he is and has, is an article of merchandize. What can 
he owe his master ? A rustic may lay a wager with his mule, and 
*Uow the creatnre to beat him in tbo -••'"-'> they rur>- ^^^ ^a\- g\x» 



49 

the mule the peck of oats, which he had permitted the animal to wirt. 
But who in sober earnest could call this a pecuniary transaction ? 

The servitude of Onesimus, whatever it might have been, could not 
have been as absolute and degrading as is endured by the American 
slave. But did Paul send Onesimus back, to be in any sense the slave 
of Philemon ? Thus far had I written, when with emotions I know 
not how to describe, I read Prof. Stuart's letter to Dr. Fisk. With 
a confidence quite characteristic, the Professor exclaims, ' If any one 
doubts, let him take the case of Paul's sending Onesimus back to Phi- 
lemon, with an apology for his running away, and sending him 

BACK TO BE lIIS SERVANT FOR LIFE.' ' To BE HIS SERVANT FOR 

xiFE ! ' — To what part of the epistle could the expositor have ap- 
plied the principles of interpretation w ith such skill and effect as to 
evolve a thought so soothing to tyrants — so revolting to every man 
who loves his own nature ? Was this the passage ?— ' For perhaps he 
therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him for- 
ever.' Receive him how? Asa servant, eagerly and confidently 
exclaims our commentator ! But what wrote the apostle ? ' Not noiO 
as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, especially to tne, 
but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh and in the Lord.' 
By what system of Hermeneutics was our learned Professor author- 
ized to bereave the word ' not ' of its negative character ? According 
to Paul, Philemon was to receive Onesimus ' not as a servant ; ' — ac- 
cording to Stuart, he was to receive him ' as a servant.' If the Pro- 
fessor could be persuaded to apply the same rules of exposition to the 
writings of the abolitionists, as he has applied to the epistles of Paul, 
with whatever ' vehemence ' they might continue to ' spout,' all dif- 
ference of views and sentiments between him and them must presently 
vanish away. The harmonizing process would be as simple as it must 
be eflectual. He has only to understand them as affirming what they 
deny, and as denying what they affirm- 
How does the apostle ask Philemon to receive Onesimus ? As a 
' brother,' But was not brother with the apostle, synonymous with 
servant ? Certainly and obviously not. He holds up the one in mark- 
ed and strong contrast to the other. As a servant, Onesimus was 
* not ' to be received ; as a ' brother,' he was. From the degradation 
of the one, he was to be raised to the dignity of the other. Philemon 
was to elevate him ' above a servant.' How much ' above a servant ? ' 
Philemon was to receive him as he would naturally have received ct^ 
son of the apostle. As such Paul described him. ' Receive \\\m^ 
he writes, 'that is, mine own bowels.' Nay, more : as he would re- 
ceive the apostle himself, to whom he was under the strongest obliga- 
tions, was he to receive Onesimus. 'Receive him as myself.' Ah, 
exclaims one of our spiritual hair -splitters — philosophers, who having 
divided the hair, place ' abstract righteousness ' on the west, and ' prac- 
tical righteousness ' on the south-west side thereof, affirming at the 
same time, that the distance between them is immense — Phdemon 
was doubtless to treat Onesimus as a brother spiritually, and as a 
slave CARNALLY. Thus, he might kneel by his side at a prayer meet- 
ing, spiritually— and whip and sell him when he got home, carnally. 



30 

So Professor Stuart's dear southern brethren seem to think. But 
through all the mist and moonshine of a mere creed-defending, psalm- 
singing religion, the keen eye of the apostle clearly saw the pitiful 
shifts of such empty pretenders. He therefore asked Philemon to 
receive Onesimus as a ' brother beloved, both in the flesh and in 
the Lord.^ In all the I'elations of life, as a 3iax, and as a Christian, 
Onesimus was to be treated as Philemon would naturally treat a son of 
the apostle — nay, the apostle himself.' 

In relation to the 15th verse, the same logical writer from v.hom I 
have several times quoted, says : 

' The declaration that perhaps Onesimus was removed from his 
master for a time, that the latter might enjoy him forever, manifestly 
relates to a future state of glory — not to a state of confirmed servitude 
on earth. The language is plainly applicable to a future state, and 
the context requires that it should be interpreted in that sense.' 

These expositions of Paul's instructions to Philemon, are perfectly 
consistent with the tenor of the gospel. Admitting, then, for the 
sake of argument, that Onesimus, previous to his escape, was a slave, 
Paul did not send him back as di fugitive slave, but a ' beloved brother,'^ 
the representative of Paul himself. If Paul sent back Onesimus a 
slave, to wear out his life in unrequited toil, he evidently disregarded 
the command of God, ' Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the 
servant which is escaped from his master unto thee ; ' and Christianity 
itself is made an instrument to torture humanit}^ : — slavery is rights 
aiid the gentleman's abhorrence of' it is fanaticism and sheer heresy. 
If this is the case, abolitionists do well not to follow an example so 
abhorrent to every tie of nature ; and Paul's writings are only slave 
«odes for the southern man-buyers . But on the other hand, if the 
remarks are correct which have been made on these passages, aboli- 
tionists shouki not hesitate a moment, in sending back the converted 
runaway to a righteous Philemon. Were the slaveholders of the 
South, Philemons, how long, think ye, would slavery exist ?* The 
idea then, tliat Paul would consign to hopeless bondage a distinguished 
' brother,' to drag out a life of wretchedness, is libelous in the extreme. 



* If any one will read the .character of Phllemjii given by Paul, it will soon be 
discovered how disgraced he is, by a comparison vv'ith American slaveholders. Phi- 
lemon was distiiigui.shed for his love ' toward the Lord Jesus, and toward all saints.' 
Are southern slaveholders distinguished for this ? They offer large rewards for their 
brethren— (v.'hite brethren I mean.)— $10,000 for Rev. Mr. Phelps— $20,000 for 
Arthur T;i.ppan, &c. &c. Tliey sentenced Amos Dresser to receive twentv lash- 
Es ON ins BARK BACK, for Selling Cottage Bibles ! Oh, how 'the bowels of the sainla 
are refreshed ' by southern slaveholders. Would it be sate for a northern minister, 
of abolition sentirnents, to visit the South ? His body, at all events, would be ro- 
freshed with a ^delicious' coat of tar and feathers, and his neck stretched without 
bpneiit of clergy I I might mcni.ion luaiiy other characteristic?, but 1 forbear. 



51 

' On christian principles, Philemon was sacredly bound to do what, on 
christian prirtbiples, Paul, as a minister of Christ, might with great 
boldness command him to do.' ' In the strongest and most emphatic 
terms, he requested Philemon to enfranchise Onesimus.' Would 
slaveholders admit of such ' beseeching 1 ' What more have abolition. 
ists done, tlian to ' beseech ' the slaveholder to enfranchise his slaves ! 
On what other grounds than christian principles have they demanded 
their emancipation ? Has their course been marked by any other 
fanaticism ? Is this spirit ' rancorous ' and ' full of hate ? ' Say, thou 
hair-splitting Pharisee, canst thou, with all thy sophistry and misrep- 
resentation, explain the difference between the ' beseechings ' of Paul, 
and of modern abolitionists? 'Receive him as a brother.' — [PmiL] 
* Receive him as a brother — look on the down-trodden slave as a mariy 
made in the image of God, and possessed of certain inalienable rights, 
among which ra-e life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.' — [Aholi- 
tionists.'\ 

But ' by pious masters tlius slavery is virtually destroyed.' Then 
slavery is not a malum in se, but Its wickedness consists in its abuses. 
Just the point exactly ! After having digested a great deal of incon- 
gruous matter, the gentleman states, that it is the character and con- 
dition of slavery that is v>^rong, and not slavery itself. Indeed, there 
is in the terms here used, < pious masters' and ' virtually abolished,' a 
glaring incongruity ! To solve this 'problem' requires « the micro- 
scopic eye of the most acute hair-splitter ! ' A riim-sdhr becomes 
' pious ; ' — he still continues to sell the poison to a poor drunken 
v/retch, who is thereby starving his family. Why not say, that the 
traffick is ' virtually destroyed ! ' Thus by ' pious ' rum-sellcrs, in. 
•temperance is ' virtually destroyed ! ' With tliis prescription, 'three 
fourths of all the Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, and Presbyteri- 
ans, in eleven states of the Union,' may continue to sell and buy their 
bretliren, may lash and cruelly use their slaves, and no wrong is done 
—slavery is ' virtually abolished ! ' V/hat can be more soothing to 
the consciences of southern despots, than this doctrine ? Verily, the 
gentleman is opposed to slavery 1 ' As lean not believe that slavery is 
wrong in itself, I am decidedly opposed to the measures of the aboli- 
tionists ! ' Sach is the amount of the gentleman's doctrine. 

A^"SV,"EE TO OKE IXCiUIIlY OF THE GEXTLE3IAX. 

' Wliai have abolitionists done ? ' 

In the words of Garrison, ' they have done more during the past 
vcar, to overthrow the sypten) of slavery, than has been accomplished 



52 

by the gradualists in hall' a century. They have succeeded in fast- 
ening the attention of the nation- upon its enormities, and in piercing 
the callous consciences of the planters. They are reforming and 
consolidating public opinion, dispelling the mists of error, inspiring the 
hearts of the timid, enlightening the eyes of the blind, and disturbing 
the slumbers of the guilty.' Colonizationists gather a few leaves, 
which the tree has cast off, and vaunt of the deed ; abolitionists ' lay 
the axe at once at its roots, and put their united nerve into the steel ; ' 
nor shall their strokes be in vain — for soon shall 'this poison-tree of 
lust and blood, and of all abominable and heartless iniquity, fall before 
them, and law and love, and God and man, shout victory over its ru- 
ins.' They have emancipated 80,000 slaves in the British colonies 
in 1834, and more than 400,000 on the first of August 1838. In the 
southern states, many slaveholders have liberated their slaves under 
abolition influence, among whom we may mention J. G. Birney, now 
a distinguished abolitionist. ' The South can tell what abolitionists 
have done.' ' An unfaithful and corrupt church can tell. Abolition- 
ists have created a conscience for them, which will never sleep, until 
every slave is emancipated, and every colored man acknowledged as a 
brother.' Texas, a nest of slaveholders, has been kept out of the 
Union by abolition influence. Is all this nothing ? But suppose 
they had not as yet been the means of liberating one slave, they still 
have achieved glorious results. In every cause of reform, there are 
preliminaries to be arranged — the ground is to be broken up and pre- 
pared for the seed ; this is half the Avork. But a few years have 
elapsed since the Anti-Slavery Reform commenced ; and in this time 
the public mind has been prepared for great things — prejudice and 
error liave been combatted and destroyed, and the nation prepared to 
receive the truth. Is this nothing ? How long did temperance advo- 
cates toil before they succeeded ? A few years since this reform com- 
menced in Boston, and they have succeeded in a great measure in 
changing public opinion on this subject. Fewer years have elapsed 
since the fonnation of the first Anti- Slavery Society in the same city 
by a few individuals ; and have the results been less glorious ? Has 
public opinion been less changed ? Anti-slavery sentiments have 
spread over all the North ; their virtue has distilled itself in the air 
of the South, and slaveholders are startled. They have irradiated 
light, and the darkness is fled. Men and women of all classes are 
pledging themselves for God and liberty. The moral power of most 
nf tl)P North !=< arrnvod ajrainst slavcrv. h all thi? nothinjr? He 



58 

who will look on and see these tilings, ami not be convinced, would not 
be though one rose from the dead.* 

RECAPITULATION. 

I have thus far briefly examined the ' objections ' of the gentleman. 
What importance may hereafter be attached to them, is for the reader 
to say. In relation to the spirit which is exhibited throughout the 
discourse, there appears to be a settled determination to injure the 
cause of holy liberty, by any and every means capable of invention. 
The whole sermon is aimed at the root of abolitionism. Misrepre- 
sentation, ridicule, and sarcasm, are each of them taxed, to drive men 
and women from the position which they have taken in behalf of 
bleeding humanity. There is no eye had upon principle — no firm, un- 
yielding stand on principle ; expediency is the grand moving object 
— a base bowing before the shiune of public opinion, and man is the 
creature of circumstances. He is robbed of that innate and God-like 
dignity — that man-distinguishing privilege, to think and act for him- 
self, irrespective of the world around liim. He must succumb to tiie 
will of the many, whether right or wrong ; thus yielding to a species 
of aristocracy, more blighting to liberty than that which shackles the 
American slave. There is no grappling with the spirit of darkness 
in a death-struggle — no fearless^onset made upon the enemies of God 
and man — no bold and daring arm wielded in defense of the rigfit ; 
but in this dreadful moral warfare, where brother is pitched against 
brother, and sister against sister, there is a parley with the enemy : — 
none of that spirit which filled the bosom of the primitive Christians, and 
which caused them to embrace the stake rather than yield their princi- 
ples — none of that spirit which moved Luther, Melancthon, and Calvin, 
to struggle against Anti-Christ, and by which they finally broke the 
spell of age,-and lighted up the surrounding darkness — none of that spirit 
which lighted up the fires of Smithfield — none of that spirit which 
led the < fanatical ' Puritans to embark from their native land, and 
seek an asylum in a foreign and inhospitable clime — none of that spirit 
which actuated Benezet and Edwards ; — in fine, truth, honesty, free- 



* The gentleman stated that English abolitionists did not sympathize with Amer- 
ican abohtionists. This is entirely incorrect. George Thompson was delegated by 
Englisli abohtionists to this country, and every body knows what treatment he re- 
ceived from American anti-aholiiionists. Drs. Cox and Hobbes were delegated by 
Enghsh abohtionists to this country, and instructed to declare their abhorrence of 
American slavery, and their sympathy for American abolitionists. Meetings arc 
frequently held in different parts of Britain, for the purpose of sympathizing with 
American abolitionists. So much for the gentleman's as.-ertion ! 



54 

(loin, and ciirisliariity, are all sacrificed. Oppression shakes hands 
with oppression, and Vac northern apologist would receive a traitor's 
boon from the Uly finger of the Sovith. 

The gentleman, for what purpose I know not, calls abolition ' mod- 
ern abolition.' Is bn one that believes tJiat ' self-evident truth ' a mere 
' rhetorical flourish V Is he so little acquainted with the history of 
the past ? — Go bade to the Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, and see 
first principles brought to liglit, and the genius of liberty in embryo. 
See them v/orking, like • the still small voice,' in the English revolu- 
tion of 1678. One hundred years at'ter, see them embodied in the 
great charter of Anasrican liberty. See their champions in a Hop- 
kins of Rhode Island, a Jay of New York, an Edv/ards of Connecti- 
cut, Franklin and Bush, Benczct and Woolman of Pennsylvania, Wil- 
berforce, Sharp, Clarkson and Wesley of England, and Lafayette of 
France.* Is abolition then a new thing ? Its principles may have 
slumbered or have been driven into a small space, but nov/, thank 
God, they have arisen v/ith new life and vigor ; — like Christianity 
arising out of the ashes of the martyrs— their blood threw vigor and 
nerve into its arm, and woe has been unto the powers of darkness. 
It is not then a mere 'fanciful speculation,' a 'fanatical chimera.' — 
Its principles are eternal, co-existent witli God, and ere the earth was 
brought forth out of chaos, tliey shed rich luster around his throne — 
they will live, and on the ruins of the universe, remain to light the 
spirit upward. 

Again — the gentleman states that abolition is the cause of disturb- 
ance in churches, &c. 'It disturbs precisely that harmony in a 
church which ought to be disturbed, viz. harmony of sin.' The ar- 
gument amounts to this, we must not rebuke sin, that is, we must not . 
be faithful in christian duty and in obeying scripture, because it dis- 
turbs the peace of tlie church. Such a chui»ch should be disturbed — 
the gospel is a great disturber of the harmony of such churches. Its 
spiritual condition must be lamentable, if it can not hear the ' whole 
counsel of God.' It amounts to something else — the peace of the 
few must be regarded rather than the well-being of the many, that is, 
they must institute a church aristocracy — ecclesla rec[iescat in pace 
caelum mat — and we must be church-ridden and priest-ridden, and 
slavery be perpetuated until the resurrection. 



* ' In 1788, Tififnyolto wn? rnrollod n!. liis own rtiqucpt, ainon;;'st the lioiiorary and 
<'orrespondin^ members' of a society toniicd for ' the manumipsion of "laves and 
the abolifion of slavery.' 



55 

Again — the gentleman is e>:ticiuely teltish. It is evident that he 
does not regard the slave as a brother, if a man ; or if so, he must be 
cruel to shield his oppressor. Throughout his whole discourse, he 
does not once candidly consider, or refer to the object of our benevo- 
lent efforts. This is the difficulty with such apologists, — looking at 
slavery in the abstract, its victim is entirely abstracted or put out of 
sight ; slavery, they say, is an evil, but it would appear they mean, on 
the part of the master only. The slave after all is to be dealt with 
only as suits the master. In the name of common sense, is slavery 
no evil to the slave? — is he entirely beneath the notice of these gentle- 
men ? Oh that they would leave dry abstraction and regard the in- 
terests of the slave ! If the object of the humane exertions of abo- 
litionists, was a son or a daughter of the gentleman, v.'ould he so mor- 
alize and deliberate on the subject of their release ? VVould'he say, 
it is wrong for them to escape from the clutches of their oppressor ? 
or, wrong to assist them in escaping ? Or suppose a Barbary Cor- 
sair should capture and carry to Algiers the Rev. Sir himself, to drag 
out a life of woe and wretchedness under this ' divine institution,' 
would the course of the abolitionists be too ' denunciatory and reck- 
less ' if they stirred up the whole Union in his behalf? Oh no. That 
concerns me ! I am a. descendant of the revolutionaries of '76, and 
have a white skin withal ! Enslave me ! No ! Sympathy never passes 
'beyond mixe — he never considers that the slaves are husbands, pa- 
rents and children, and that their ties are as tender as those of their 
masters. These are ruthlessly torn asunder and annihilated. The 
air reverberates with the cries of the disconsolate husband and wid- 
owed woman, and echo like deep-toned thunder calls for relief. They 
may weep until their tears settle into pools at their feet, yet because 
they are tinged with ebony, we must not send them help, or respond to 
the groans of humanity. Very little^is wrong — and the ' pious ' (?) 
minister meets the slaveholder with all due deference and exemplary 
humility, and perhaps his hands may have just reeked with the blood 
of his victim — but nothing is wrong. Nero fiddled when Rome was 
burning, and lighted up his gardens with the bodies of Christians ; but 
the indifference of these pious ones vvould shock even Nero or Caligula. 

Again — the gentleman is no abolitionist, and can not consistently 
say he is opposed to slavery. When once told, by a member of his 
congregation, that he was not an abolitionist, he resented it very high- 
ly, and then shortly after preached the sermon under consideration. 
He is such an abolitionist as the South desires — one who opposes the 
cflbrts of those in favor of emancipation — one who never exposes the 



56 

abominations of sUiveiy — one who bus not made his peace with th& 
free colored man, and wishes him banished to Africa — one who does 
not sympathize with the friends of the oppressed when mobbed.* An 
abolitionist who says slavery is wrong, and yet wrotig to assist a man 
in escaping from it ! If this is not acknowledging the right of the 
slaveholder to his slave, I do not understand the force of words. An 
abolitionist who says that when masters are pious, slavery is virtually 
abolished thereby, making it a righteous relation ! A friend to the 
oppressed, and refuse to give notice to his congregation of a monthly- 
concert to be held for the enslaved If If he is opposed to slavery, 
and abolitionists are opposed to slavery — so far they are both right : — 
why not co-operate with each other? Why not unite in this mighty- 
moral contest, in which there arc only friends and foes, for the truth ? 
He can unite with Baptists and Methodists in revivals, although on 
some points they are very different. Why not pursue the same course 
in relation to the aLn^lition of slavery ? Oh, no. Here he stops and 
betrays most intelligible moral cowardice. He graduates his standard 
in relation to the delicate question of slavery, by the scale of public 
opinion. When that opinion sanctions the enslavement of men, it is 
his vox Dei! — a quantinn sitjficit J — and his lips are as closed on this 
subject, as those of a cast-iron image. Such abolitionists are all men ; 
such abolitionists were those who dragged Garrison through the streets 
of Boston — who shot down Lovejoy — who burnt Philadelphia Hall. 
It is such abolition as would perpetuate slavery to the latest genera- 
tion. 

Again — the gentleman knew little about the topic he discussed. — 
The most common events in the history of the anti-slavery enterprise 
are entirely overlooked. None of the interesting events of the day 
are hinted at ; the familiar ABC doctrines of abolitionism are un- 
known. The gentleman betrays the most profound ignorance of fun- 
damental principles ; and the production altogether, is a most unin- 
telligible, uncharitable, ridiculous, and absurd jargon of words. He 
has contented himself, like the godly (?) Pharisee of old, to thank God 
that he is not of the 'poor and despised sect.' Guarded by 7iis pulpit, 



* The gentleman stated to the writer, during the excitement which prevailed in 
his village, when the friends of freedom wcr«^ mobbed and insulted, that he had as 
much sympathy for the mohocrats as the abolitionists, and that he would as soon 
have the spirit of the one in his church as the other. 

+ The gentleman actually refused to read a notice of this kind, handed to him by 
an elder of liis own church. 



57 

ilicrc he has intrenched himself, and hurled his brulem fulmcns, and 
' vociferations'. ' Very ' appropriate business ' for a minister of Christ ! 

Again — abohtion has nothing to fear from such men and such ser- 
mons. It is the wildest chimera for the gentleman to suppose he can 
crush the cause of holy liberty. He might as well undertake to ex- 
tinguish the fires of Vesuvius with a thinible-fuU of water, or preach 
Niagara into silence, as to attempt to put out the fires of freedom. 
It is like Xerxes, who beat the ocean for its iminidence ! It is nearly 
six years since this enterprise commenced. During this time it has 
met with the most determined opposition from clericals and non-cler- 
icals, the respectable and the low, the learned and the vulgar, law 
makers and law breakers, the very faeces of society. It has been as- 
sailed with clerical appeals and protests, sermons and exhortations, 
showers of addled eggs, brickbats, and stones, unanswerable * syllo- 
gisms of feathers ' and ' deductions of tar. ' But what of that ? — 
They have all been, like the gentleman's discourse, complete abortions ! 
x\bolition has increased rapidly ; the shadow of its gigantic stature 
has startled the South, and slavery recoils within the caverns of its 
dark prison-house. It is the opposition which it has met, that has 
thrown power into the giant's arm, and made the monster tremble for 
his life. Abolitionism now numbers most of the influential and good 
of all classes at the North. The signs of the times are ominous to 
slaveholders and their apologists — verhum sat sapienti. 

Lastly — What is abolition ? It is not that fanatical, Jacobinical, 
and wild scheme, which the gentleman has represented it to be. It is 
more peaceable, and far more glorious. ' It is to treat all men as 
men ' — as immortal beings, born to occupy a dignified station. It 
means that the title of property in man shall cease — that every hus- 
band shall have his own wife, and every wife her own husband, con- 
nected by a tic which God has sanctioned, and commanded no man 
to sunder. It means that parents should have the control over their 
own children, and be allowed to instruct tiiem — it means that men 
shall pay their laborers for their work — ' that right shall take the su- 
premacy over wrong, principle over brute force, humanity over cruel- 
ty, honesty over theft, purity over lust, honor over baseness, love over 
hatred, and religion over heathenism.' It means that the colored man 
is a MAN. Is there any thing sanguinary or horrid in all this ? Is 
there any man who breathes the air of liberty, who will despise and 
reject it ? You may say this is not all of abolition ! Yes, reader this 
is all of abolition. What Rev. B. F. Wile adds to it, does not make 

a part of it. Abolitionists are not accountable for every bug-bear his 

8 



58 

imagination can bring into existence. You are not to depend on 
men who knov; nothing about it, to find out what abohtion is. If you 
have no anti-slavery pubUcations, read the speeches of Patrick Hen- 
ry, John Hancock, and George Washington — read the Declaration of 
Independence and the Constitution of the United States — read the 5th 
chapter of Matthew — read the sermons of Christ and the epistles of 
Paul ; these contain all of abolition. See it in the exercise of your 
own fire-side privileges. Can you claim your own body and use your 
locomotives at will ? — recollect there are more than two and a half 
millions in your own country who can not do it ; their hmbs are 
shackled and chained. Can you claim the hire of your own services ? 
There are millions who toil and sweat from morn to night, to support 
and pamper the pride of despots. Can you claim your wife and child- 
ren as yours, without fears of having them stolen from you ? There 
are millions — aye, of your own. fellow citizens, whose wives are torn 
from them and sold to irresponsible and cruel masters, whose children 
are snatched from their embrace and ^shipped' to the far South, out 
of their sight forever. Are you abused and insulted, and can you 
appeal to the law and obtain justice ? Recollect that for the poor 
slave there is no law ; he may be abused, wronged, lacerated, whipped, 
and chained, and no arm of law can reach him or save him. Oh, 
reader, remember the down-trodden and insulted negro. Unite with 
me in bidding God speed to that grand movement which holds out 
light and life to the slave ; bid it roll on until slavery is dead — dead 
and buried. 

' Let mammon liold, while mammon csn, 
The bones and blood of living man ; 
Let tyrants scorn, while tyrants dare, 
The shrieks and -writhings of despair ; 
The end will come, it will not wait, 
Bonds, yokes, and scourges have their date. 
Slavery itself must pass away, 
And be a tale of yesterday.' 



59 



NOTE. 

After thu form was struck off which contains a letter from New York to Mr. 
Garrison, relative to the free churches of that city, another letter appeared in the 
Liberator, written by Lewis Tappan, denying many of the charges of Mr. Davison. 
For the purpose of understanding both sides, and the affair as it is, we insert the let. 
t€r witla a remark from the editor : 

To the Editor of the Liberator : — 

Perceiving in your paper of the 5th, a letter signed H. W. Davison, dated in this 
city, respecting the call of Rev. Joel Parker to the Tabernacle church, in which my 
name is mendoned, that contains several incorrect statements, clothed in very rep- 
rehensible language, I hasten to give you a relation of facts in justice to all con- 
cerned. H. W. D. styles Mr. Parker, ' the great apologist for slavery ; ' whereas he 
professes to be opposed to it, but had not sufficient hatred to this system of iniquity, 
or enough moral courage, to urge its sinfulness upon his slaveholding church at New 
Orleans. H. W. D. represents that Mr. Parker arrived in this city about three 
months since, that he was immediately invited to preach at the Tabernacle, that a 
minority of the people made strenuous exertions to have him for their pastor ; but 
finding the abolitionists too strong for them, they invited the First Free Church to 
unite with them, under the joint pastoral care of Rev. George Duffiield, ' a true abo- 
lidonist, and J. Helflenstein, a zealous colonizationist,' who continued, amidst strifo 
and contention, a short dme, when both resigned. And he further states, that thi 
way being thus cleared, Rev. Joel Parker received a call to supply the vacancy ly a 
small majority of the members — that the writer and other true friends of hberty will 
not remain, &,c. All this is incorrect. 

The facts are, that Mr. Parker was not invited to preach at the Tabernacle, until 
long after the two churches had been harmoniously united under the pastoral care of 
Messrs. Duffield and Helffenstein ; and when it was found that the united church 
could not support two ministers, a few members, as a self-constituted committee, con- 
ferred with the pastors, and, after intimating that the united churches would not ac- 
quiesce in either remaining as sole pastor, induced both to tender their resignations. 
Mr. Parker had previously been invited by the pastors to preach on one occasionu 
Wlien it was ascertained that both pastors would leave, the thoughts of the churck 
were turned to Mr. Parker as successor. It is true, that some thought at the time, 
and do still, that it was in the contemplation of the self-appointed committee to invite 
Mr. Parker before a vacancy was created ; and considerable dissatisfaction has been, 
and still is, felt, in and out of the church at the supposed ill-treatment of Mr. Duf- 
field. Providence opened a field of usefulness to both the late pastors immediately, 
Mr. Helffenstein accepting a call from Chambersburgb, Pa., and Mr. Duffield from 
Detroit, Michigan. While they were in the pastoral charge at the Tabernacle, there 
was no strife nor contention in the church. 

Shortly after the resignation of the two pastors, the church held a meeting to con- 
sider the subject of choosing a pastor. Mr. Parker was nominated, and his merits 
and fitness for the post were discussed at length during two protracted sessions of tho 
church. Those who advocated the nomination of Mr. Parker, spoke of him as the 
pioneer minister of the free churches in this city, of his peculiar talents as a preacher, 
of his consistency, prudence, success in revivals, moral courage, the probability that 
he would attract a large congregation, and thus make it easy io support public wor- 
ship, beside liquidating the debt due by the Tabernacle church. Those who opposed 
the nomination, (audi confess that I wnsone of the number,) showed the great in- 
consistency heticcen Mr. Parkefs preaching and conduct before and sin/:e his^ 
residence at New Orleans. The result was not, however, as H. W. Davison has 
stated, that Mr. Parker was ealled ' by a small majority of the members,' as only 
twenty-eight persons voted in the negative I It is not known to nae v/hether the calt 
will be accepted or not, and no members of the church, to my knowledge, have de- 
clared that they will not remain. 

I have thus given a correct statement of facts, and can not but lament that any 
one, although under feelings irritated by provocation, should have made so maay 



00 

errors in communicating to you a history of the afiairs of the Tabernacle church, . 
leading you to head it ' ecclesiastical juggling,' and have used language so highly im- 
proper. 

I might have stated, that 11. W. Davison is in error also in styling Mr. Hclffen- 
etein ' a zealous colonizationist,' as I irevcr heard him mention the expatriation soci^ 
ety while he ministered at the Tabernacle. He also commits an egregious mistake 
in saying that Mr. Morse of the N. Y. Observer, and Mr. Halo of the Journal of 
Commerce, have connected themselves with this congregation within the last three 
♦jnonths. Mr. Hale has been a member of the church a long time, and Mr. Moi'se 
has never united with it.' 

The following is the remark of the editor of the Liberator : 

• We published the letter of Mr. Davison, in a late number, respecting the Taber- 
nacle church at New York, and Mr. Parker, &c., because the author wrote over his 
own signature. It seems, by the letter of our brother Lewis Tappan, that Mr. D. 
has fallen into several errors, though correct in his statement that .loel Parker, of 
New Orleans, has been invited to be the pastor of that church. How any of our 
abolition brethren can be willing to rit under the preaching of .Toel Parker, the despi- 
ser and enemy of colored humanity — the warm abettor of that monstrous crusade 
which is waged against the existence of our colored countrymen on this their native 
soil — the ' dumb dog' who was afraid to open his lips against slavery during his resi- 
.dence in New Orleans — an enemy of the freedom of speech and of the press — and 
.a participator in the riots in Alton, which ended in the murder of Lovejoy — is to us 
incomprehensible. It will be remembered, that in the very height of the bloody 
tempest in Alton, a colonization meeting was held in that place at which inflamma- 
tory speeches Were made against the abolitionists, evidently designed, and certainly 
calculated, at least to prevent the re-estabhshment of the Alton Observer, by adding 
new fuel to the raging fire of pubhc phrenzy. At that meeting, its editor was mis- 
represented, denounced, and pointed at by the finger of opprobrium. At that meet- 
ing, Joel Parker took a conspicuous part. And it was that meeting wliich sealed 
the death-warrant of the lamented Lovejoy. 

One of the reasons wliich our brother Tappan states was given in church-meeting, 
why Mr. Parker should be the pastor at the Tabernacle, was ' the probability that he 
would attract a large congregation, and thus make it easy to support public worship, 
beside hqiudating the debt due by the church ' ! A nice calculation. I'hus it is that 
principle is sacrificed to interest. Cut a God of justice will surely frustrate all such 
contrivances.' 



1 a Mg- ■■' 

ERRATUM. 

?th page, 18 hues from bottom, foi- ' dirrct despotism,' read direst despotism- 



§4 V 






v^ .*Jm^*, '^^ -ftp v'^*^' 







"■' <* ., <- '•""" ♦' 











^^0^ 



^^ •■«>•* 











•^ 







o 



*^- 










